Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Believers Church Bible - Romans
Believers Church Bible - Romans
Bible Commentary
Editorial Council
David Baker, Brethren Church
Lydia Harder, Mennonite Church Canada
Estella B. Horning, Church of the Brethren
Robert B. Ives, Brethren in Christ Church
Gordon H. Matties, Mennonite Brethren Church
Paul M. Zehr (chair), Mennonite Church USA
Believers Church
Bible Commentary
Romans
John E. Toews
HERALD PRESS
Scottdale, Pennsylvania
Waterloo, Ontario
Bible text is mostly from New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright
1989 by the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the
Churches of Christ in the USA, and used by permission. Abbreviations listed
on page 6 identify other versions briefly compared.
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher or a license permitting restricted copying. Such licenses are issued on
behalf of Herald Press by Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood
Drive, Danvers, MA 01923; phone 978-750-8400; fax 978-750-4470;
www.copyright.com.
BELIEVERS CHURCH BIBLE COMMENTARY: ROMANS
Copyright 2004 by Herald Press, Scottdale, Pa. 15683
Released simultaneously in Canada by Herald Press,
Waterloo, Ont. N2L 6H7. All rights reserved
Library of Congress Control Number: 2003025237
International Standard Book Number: 0-8361-9277-X
Printed in the United States of America
Cover and charts by Merrill R. Miller
12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
To order or request information, please call 1-800-759-4447 (individuals);
1-800-245-7894 (trade). Website: www.heraldpress.com
Abbreviations/Symbols
*
+
BCBC
[bracketed term]
//
cf.
ch/s.
e.g.
et al.
KJV
Lit
LXX
n
NIV
note/s
NRSV
NT
OT
RSV
TDNT
TBC
TLC
v./vv.
Contents
Series Foreword ......................................................................15
Authors Preface ....................................................................17
Introduction to Romans ......................................................19
Why Romans ..........................................................................20
The Churches in Rome ............................................................21
The Pastoral Context in Rome ..................................................27
The Purpose of Romans ..........................................................28
The Perspective of This Commentary ........................................29
The Over-all Plan of Romans ....................................................31
The Larger Thought World of Romans ......................................32
The Problem of Language ........................................................35
This Commentary ................................................................36
Introduction, 1:1-15 ................................................................37
Prescript, 1:1-7 ......................................................................37
Thanksgiving, 1:8-12 ..............................................................43
Disclosure Formula, 1:13-15 ....................................................44
The Framing, 1:1-15, 15:14-33 ..............................................45
*Gospel ..................................................................................48
+Gospel ..................................................................................49
+The Obedience of Faith..........................................................49
The Thesis Statement, 1:16-18 ............................................50
The Thesis, 1:16 ....................................................................51
The
The
The
The
Series Foreword
The Believers Church Bible Commentary Series makes available a
new tool for basic Bible study. It is published for all who seek more
fully to understand the original message of Scripture and its meaning
for todaySunday school teachers, members of Bible study groups,
students, pastors, and others. The series is based on the conviction
that God is still speaking to all who will listen, and that the Holy Spirit
makes the Word a living and authoritative guide for all who want to
know and do Gods will.
The desire to help as wide a range of readers as possible has determined the approach of the writers. Since no blocks of biblical text are
provided, readers may continue to use the translation with which they
are most familiar. The writers of the series use the New Revised
Standard Version, the Revised Standard Version, the New
International Version, and the New American Standard Bible on a
comparative basis. They indicate which text they follow most closely,
and where they make their own translations. The writers have not
worked alone, but in consultation with select counselors, the series
editors, and the Editorial Council.
Every volume illuminates the Scriptures; provides necessary theological, sociological, and ethical meanings; and, in general, makes
the rough places plain. Critical issues are not avoided, but neither
are they moved into the foreground as debates among scholars. Each
section offers explanatory notes, followed by focused articles, The
Text in Biblical Context and The Text in the Life of the Church.
The writers have done the basic work for each commentary, but
not operating alone, since no . . . scripture is a matter of ones own
interpretation (2 Pet. 1:20; cf. 1 Cor. 14:29). They have consulted
15
16
Series Foreword
with select counselors during the writing process, worked with the editors for the series, and received feedback from another biblical scholar. In addition, the Editorial Council, representing six believers church
denominations, reads the manuscripts carefully, gives churchly
responses, and makes suggestions for changes. The writer considers
all this counsel and processes it into the manuscript, which the
Editorial Council finally approves for publication. Thus, these commentaries combine the individual writers own good work and the
churchs voice. As such, they represent a hermeneutical communitys
efforts in interpreting the biblical text, as led by the Spirit.
The term believers church has often been used in the history of
the church. Since the sixteenth century, it has frequently been applied
to the Anabaptists and later the Mennonites, as well as to the Church
of the Brethren and similar groups. As a descriptive term, it includes
more than Mennonites and Brethren. Believers church now represents specific theological understandings, such as believers baptism,
commitment to the Rule of Christ in Matthew 18:15-20 as crucial for
church membership, belief in the power of love in all relationships,
and willingness to follow Christ in the way of the cross. The writers
chosen for the series stand in this tradition.
Believers church people have always been known for their emphasis on obedience to the simple meaning of Scripture. Because of this,
they do not have a long history of deep historical-critical biblical scholarship. This series attempts to be faithful to the Scriptures while also
taking archaeology and current biblical studies seriously. Doing this
means that at many points the writers will not differ greatly from interpretations that can be found in many other good commentaries. Yet,
these writers share basic convictions about Christ, the church and its
mission, God and history, human nature, the Christian life, and other
doctrines. These presuppositions do shape a writers interpretation of
Scripture. Thus this series, like all other commentaries, stands within
a specific historical church tradition.
Many in this stream of the church have expressed a need for help
in Bible study. This is justification enough to produce the Believers
Church Bible Commentary. Nevertheless, the Holy Spirit is not bound
to any tradition. May this series be an instrument in breaking down
walls between Christians in North America and around the world,
bringing new joy in obedience through a fuller understanding of the
Word.
The Editorial Council
Authors Preface
I have lived and slept with Pauls Letter to the Romans for over 30
years. It started with the simultaneous reading of Romans in Greek
and Rudolf Bultmanns Theology of the New Testament during the
summer of 1969 while in doctoral studies. I was persuaded that
Bultmann misunderstood Paul. So began a life-long pilgrimage of
reading and re-reading Romans and about Romans.
The work on this commentary began twenty years ago, and has
gone through numerous drafts. Because I was involved in senior
administration for most of this timeAcademic Dean and Acting
President at the Mennonite Brethren Biblical Seminary in Fresno,
California (1980-93), and President of Conrad Grebel University
College in Waterloo, Ontario (1996-2002)I worked on Romans
Saturday mornings and on sabbaticals (1988 and 1993 at Biblical
Seminary, 2003 at Conrad Grebel). I would try to move the previous
draft forward each sabbatical, but ended up re-writing much of the
text.
My constant companions and dialogue partners over the years
have been my students. They have pushed and challenged me,
encouraged me, and forced me to clarify my thinking. To them I give
my utmost thanks and to them I dedicate this commentary. Two of the
most significant former students have been Gordon Zerbe and Wally
Kroeker. The former helped me develop the initial bibliography of
works on Romans in 1978, and later served as my peer reader for the
Believers Bible Commentary Series. His helpful questions and
thoughtful suggestions have helped me nuance my work and corrected numerous errors. Wally Kroeker edited the entire manuscript and
17
18
Authors Preface
Introduction to
Romans
The New Testament letter to the Romans was written by Paul, apostle of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles. As an apostle, Paul spent his life
traveling the Mediterranean area preaching the gospel and establishing churches. In the course of this missionary career he wrote numerous letters to the churches he had established as a way to pastor them
in his absence [Essay: Letter Form].
Romans was written from Corinth between late A.D. 55 and early
A.D. 57 at a turning point in Pauls career. He had established churches from Jerusalem in the East to Illyricum (Rom. 15:19present day
Serbia).
When writing Romans, Paul is about to leave Corinth for
Jerusalem with an offering from the churches of Macedonia and
Achaia (Rom. 15:23-29). Thereafter, he plans to visit the churches in
Rome and then travel west to Spain.
Why Romans?
Romans is the longest and most complex of Pauls letters. Why would
he write this letter to churches in the capital of the Empirechurches
he had not founded? The introduction and conclusion of the letter,
the letter-frame, in 1:1-15 and 15:14-33, give four answers: 1) Paul
wrote to impart some spiritual gift to the churches (1:11); 2) Paul
wrote to reap some harvest among the Christians in Rome (1:13);
3) Paul wrote to remind the Romans of some things (15:15); 4) Paul
wrote because he planned to visit Rome and hoped to gain support
from the Roman churches for a mission in Spain (15:22-29).
The last reason helps explain parts of chs. 1 and 15, but it does
20
Introduction to Romans
21
not provide an adequate reason for the whole of Romans. The larger,
real purpose must be to impart some gift, to reap some harvest, to
remind the followers of Jesus of some things.
The importance of the first three reasons is underlined by the
rhetorical form of Romans. The letter is concerned with more than
communicating information. It is trying to persuade the churches of
Rome about something. In the ancient world speech or writing that
was designed to persuade took one of three formsjudicial (persuade
to make a judgment about a past event), deliberative (persuade to take
some action in the future), or epideictic or demonstrative (persuade to
hold to or reaffirm a point of view in the present). There is general
agreement that Romans is a demonstrative letterit reaffirms values
held in common and tries to persuade commitment to them. This
affirmation of common values or beliefs is, of course, usually argued
over against rival values or beliefs.
What is Paul trying to remind the Romans about? What common
beliefs and values is he arguing for? There must be issues, problems,
or disagreements that need attention among the Roman churches.
22
Introduction to Romans
but the evidence suggests the churches in Rome were founded relatively early in Christian history. Acts 18:2 reports that Aquila and
Priscilla came from Rome in A.D. 49, because of the expulsion of the
Jews from Rome by the emperor Claudius. The Christian mission in
Rome had existed long enough to establish some churches. Pauls
statement in the mid-50s that, I have longed for many years to come
to you (Rom. 15:23), suggests that the churches had existed for
some time. The Roman historian Tacitus reports that there was a
large number of Christians in Rome in A.D. 64 at the time of the persecution by Nero. Sometime between Pentecost (A.D. 32-33) and
A.D. 49, some Jews in Rome became followers of Jesus and witnessed to fellow Jews and Gentile God-fearers about their faith in
Christ, and began to establish house churches.
From this limited historical evidence we can piece together the following picture: 1) the churches in Rome were founded by Jews who
became followers of Jesus; 2) the Christian faith there was closely
linked with the observance of the Jewish law and rituals; 3) the
churches met in houses (see Rom. 16); 4) the churches were effected
by Claudiuss expulsion of the Jews from Rome in A.D. 49; 5) the
churches grew; there are a good number by the time Paul writes
Romans in the mid-50s, and many Christians by A.D. 64.
Introduction to Romans
23
the Jewish people, and in A.D. 19 they were expelled for proselytizing. The Roman Emperor, Gaius (37-41), nicknamed Caligula, faced
a serious rebellion of the Jews in Alexandria, Egypt, in A.D. 38. A
Jewish delegation from Alexandria to Rome was humiliated by Gaius
with jeering support from his advisors. Gaius also insisted on placing
his statue in the Temple in Jerusalem. Only the delaying tactics of a
local governor and the death of Gaius prevented a rebellion in
Judaea.
The emperor Claudius (A.D. 41-54) restricted the public assembly of the Jews in Rome in 41, because of their growing size and
influence, and expelled them in 49 due to the agitations of a certain
Chrestus (since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the
instigation of Chrestus, he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome.
Suetonius, Claudius, XXV.4). The meaning of expelled them is
uncertainwas it all Jews, some Jews, or the Jews who made
disturbances? The traditional interpretation reads Chrestus as a
misspelling of Christus. It then interprets it as a reference to Christian
missionary activity within the Jewish community that stirred such
controversy among the Jews that Claudius began to feel threatened
and expelled the Jews from the city. However, Chrestus is probably a reference to a Jewish messianic pretenderactually present in
Rome in A.D. 49who nurtured Jewish zealot attitudes against the
government. The political agitation within the Jewish community was
so threatening that Claudius felt compelled to expel the Jews to
maintain peace in the city [Essay: Identity of Chrestus]. The Jews
were permitted to return to Rome following the death of Claudius in
54 (Walters, 1993:56ff.).
The Synagogue Structure. The central structure for the Jews in
Rome was the house synagogue of 10 to 50 people. There were hundreds of such house synagogues in Rome, and their names and locations suggest great diversity, ranging from very conservative groups
linked with Jerusalem to more liberal groups accommodating to
Hellenistic culture. No central Jewish organization controlled the
diverse groups of Jews in Rome, as in most cities of the Diaspora. The
Jews had come to Rome comparatively late, and many were slaves.
The lower class status of many of them as well as the rapid influx of
new people from military conquests, immigration, and proselytizing
required an organizational structure that could quickly assimilate new
groups. Thus, independent house synagogues emerged in different
parts of the city as need arose without strict accountability to a central
governing body.
Proselytism. The Jewish population in the Diaspora was three
24
Introduction to Romans
Introduction to Romans
25
26
Introduction to Romans
Introduction to Romans
27
28
Introduction to Romans
Introduction to Romans
29
the equality of Jew and Gentile before God. Both are judged equally
and both are made righteous equally by God through the faithfulness
of Messiah Jesus. The emphasis is on the gospel for all, both Jew and
Gentile. This equality blunts the assumption of Jewish privilege and the
Gentile presumption of superiority. The gospel as the power of God
affirms the election of Israel in continuity with the promises of God and
includes the Gentiles in the people of God in a righteous way.
Paul argues for the entry of Gentiles into Gods plan of salvation
that originated in Israel. That is why he emphasizes both the equality
of Jews and Gentiles and the priority of Israel. In the process he redefines Judaism. Paul outlines a gospel that opens the people of God to
the Gentiles on the basis of a new way to be righteous before God.
Gentile Christians are asked not to reject Israel, because God will yet
keep the promises to this people.
Romans is about relationships between two people, Jews and
Gentiles, in the gospel. It seeks the theological and social reorientation
of both Jewish and Gentile Christians. Jewish-Christian and GentileChristian congregations can live together in peace with each other and
with Jewish synagogues because both have been incorporated into the
one people that God is creating in the world. Both people become real
children of Abraham. The reconciliation of Christians and Jews and
Jewish and Gentile Christians would make Paul welcome in Rome, and
would provide a base of support for his mission to Spain.
Why Romans? Paul writes Romans to remind the Christians in the
city that God is creating one people composed of Jews and Gentiles
in the world. If that reminder is effective it will: 1) impart a spiritual
gift to the churches; 2) bear fruit; 3) correct some false teachings
about Paul and his gospel; and 4) prepare the churches to support his
mission to the West.
This reading of Romans (the particular) fits with Pauls larger mission as the Apostle of Messiah Jesus to the Gentiles (the world). His
vision is to build faithful and unified Christian communities in the
Gentile world that demonstrate the faithfulness of God to the promises to Israel and Israels scriptures (see esp. chs. 11 and 15).
30
Introduction to Romans
Introduction to Romans
31
of Gentiles into the people of God. A major issue in Judaism from the
return from the Babylonian Captivity in the late-sixth and fifth centuries B.C. on, and especially from about 200 B.C., was: what are the
criteria for participation in the covenant people? Amid the vigorous
debate about this question in Judaism, there is general agreement that
covenant people were defined by circumcision and the proper observance of food and festival laws (often called purity laws). The central
issue facing Paul in the Gentile mission is the implication of Jesus as
Gods Messiah for the incorporation of Gentiles into the people of
God. Must Gentile converts become Jews to be part of the covenant
people of God, to be Christians?
Second, the doctrine of justification is hammered out by Paul in
two lettersGalatians and Romansfor the very specific purpose of
enabling Gentile converts to be full and genuine heirs to the promises
of God to Israel without becoming ethnic Jews.
Paul is a Jewish Christian concerned to see Gods promises to
Israel brought to complete fulfillment. Christianity is the fulfillment of
Judaism, not the annulment of it. The fulfillment of Judaism means
the incorporation of Gentiles into the people of God. Pauls argument
in Romans is corporate. He is redefining the people of God to
embrace Gentiles, as well as Jews. It is about God as the God of Jews
as well as Gentiles; it is about the seed of Abraham; it is about incorporation into the new humanity of Christ over against the old humanity of Adam. Paul is redrawing the boundaries that mark out the
covenant people of God.
Third, Judaism does not teach salvation by works. Salvation in
Judaism is by Gods election, by Gods grace alone. Obedience to the
Law is a means to maintain covenant salvation, not a means to earn it.
Fourth, Romans is read as a politically subversive letter. Over
against the Roman imperial good news that Caesar is Lord, who
brings justice and peace to the world, Paul proclaims a different
gospelJesus is Lord, and he alone brings righteousness (justice)
and peace. Jesus, not Caesar, is to be confessed and worshiped.
Finally, Romans is read as a pastoral letter addressing specific and concrete pastoral problems and issues among the house churches of Rome.
32
Introduction to Romans
to shared beliefs and values, to see the gospel as the power of God
for the salvation of all people, the Jew first and also the Gentile. The
flip side is to persuade them to reject alternative beliefs and values
which distinguish between people (e.g., that Gentiles must become
Jews to be members of Gods people, or that God has rejected the
Jews as a people). Both the argumentative style and the repeated
exhortations within the letter reflect this goal of persuasion.
A letter of persuasion (epideictic or demonstrative letter) follows
a formal structural (rhetorical) pattern that is clearly evident in
Romans. The formal outline of Romans is as follows:
Prescript
Thanksgiving
Disclosure Formula
Letter thesis
Argument
Conclusion
1:1-7
1:8-12
1:13-15
1:16-18
1:18-15:13
15:14-16:27
Within this formal structure, Paul uses many forms of communication which are familiar to his audience and are consistent with the
goal of persuasion. For example, he uses chiasmsa parallel structure
or word order that frames a central idea [Essay: Chiasmus]or a diatribe, a dialogue between a teacher and an imaginary student [Essay:
Diatribe]. The goal is always persuasionto intensify commitment to
and behavior consistent with the gospel as the power of God for the
salvation of all people irrespective of ethnic origin.
Introduction to Romans
33
theology that emerged during times of intense suffering and martyrdom in Israel. This radicalization accelerated especially after 167 B.C.
and into the second century A.D.the Maccabean period. Israel is a
nation under siege. The oppression of these years gave birth to a profound awareness of the discrepancy between what is and what
should be. The conviction developed that what is is so evil that God
can no longer effect the divine will from within history. The present
world is ruled by Satan, death, and the forces of evil. Only a direct and
radical intervention of God from outside of history will be able to
change history.
History is the basic category in apocalyptic theology. The issue is
Gods plan and promises for Israel in history. The problem is Gods
apparent inability to overcome the power of evil. Once national disaster was a consequence of infidelity. Now fidelity seems to bring
national disaster as an expression of cosmic evil. The experience of
evil, and the nonfulfillment of divine promises, raises questions about
God. The problem is resolved by developing a theology that says that
Gods future will not emerge out of the present or out of history, but
will come from outside of and as a divine alternative to history.
The key theological category for this understanding of history was
the concept of two ages, the present evil age and the future age to
come. Two-age theology is fundamental to apocalyptic theology,
whether or not the code phrases are used. The heart of apocalyptic theology is a view of history in which the present is discontinuous with the
future. Such radical discontinuity is made necessary by the scope and
intensity of evil in the present, and is made possible by the faith that the
sovereignty of a righteous God will effect righteousness in the future.
Apocalyptic theology is theodicy. It seeks to resolve the problem of suffering and evil among Gods people with a fundamental dualism.
The knowledge of the reality of history and the future plan of God
to transform reality totally with the introduction of a new age is secret.
It can be known only by revelation (apocalypsis). Revelation imparts
knowledge from the divine, privileged information, to selected
prophets of God. The two-age theology combined with the revelatory
communication of the present and the future creates a fundamental
dualism that is characteristic of apocalyptic theology. The key components of the dualism are: 1) a temporal dualism: this age/the age to
come; 2) an epistemological dualism: worldly knowledge/other-worldly knowledge; 3) a cosmic dualism: earth/heaven; and 4) a social dualism: the unrighteous/the righteous.
Jewish apocalyptic theology can be expressed diagrammatically as
follows:
34
Introduction to Romans
Gods Intervention
The Present Evil Age
|
The Age to Come
The basic categories of Pauls theology, including Romans, are
apocalyptic. He uses apocalyptic language and thought forms, e.g.,
destined . . . for wrath, the wrath to come, the wrath of God,
the day of the Lord Jesus Christ, the day of salvation,
redeemed, redemption, this age, the rulers of this age, the
present evil age, the ends of the ages, new creation. But he also
transforms Jewish apocalyptic thought in light of the death/resurrection of Jesus. Paul believes that in Jesus God has already begun the
final act of transforming human history. The age to come has begun
with Jesus. The present represents the juncture or the overlapping of
the ages, as 1 Corinthians 10:11 states (literally, upon whom the
ends of the ages have met). The diagram above of Jewish apocalyptic theology is thus modified by Paul as follows:
Gods Intervention In
The Cross/Resurrection of Christ
The
|
|
Present Evil Age | The End of the Ages
Parousia of Christ
|
|
| Age to Come
Introduction to Romans
35
bondage at one level to the power of the flesh. But it goes deeper; it
is bondage to the power of the flesh which completely enslaves people and the world. Sin, in other words, is not simply a deed, but a
power-force that conquers and enslaves all creation and all human
beings.
Third, Pauls theology of salvation (soteriology) is christologically
anchored and universal in scope. Much apocalyptic theology is ambivalent about a messianic figure and is nationalistic in proclaiming salvation/liberation for the Jews only. In some of the first-century B.C.A.D. literature, a messianic figure plays a saving role, but in much of
the literature there is no messianic figure. In contrast, Pauls doctrine
of salvation is centered in Jesus as the Messiah of God. Messiah Jesus
is decisive for salvation/liberation. He, and he alone, provides an alternative to Adam. Furthermore, Messiah Jesus salvation in Paul does
not vindicate Israel vis--vis the nations, but overcomes the division
between Jews and Gentiles to create a new humanity.
Because God has acted decisively in Messiah Jesus to effect salvation for the world, Paul asserts that 1) Sin has been defeated (Gal. 1:4;
1 Cor. 15:3; Rom. 4:25); 2) death has been condemned (1 Cor.
15:54-57; Rom. 8:31-39); 3) creation itself has been reclaimed by
God, although the battle goes on toward Gods final victory (1 Cor.
15:2-28; Rom. 8:18-25); 4) Gods sovereignty has been established
(Rom. 8:31-39).
The theological grammar of Romans is apocalyptic. Pauls theology here shares the apocalyptic belief in the discontinuity of the present evil age with the age to come. But it also modifies this apocalyptic framework to announce the good news that God has now revealed
end-time righteousness and salvation for all humanity and creation in
Messiah Jesus. Jesus is Gods apocalyptic answer to the problem of
history introduced and defined by Adam (for a further discussion of
Pauls apocalyptic theology, see Beker, 1980, Boomershine, 1989,
deBoer, 1988 and 1989, Witherington, 1994).
36
Introduction to Romans
This Commentary
This commentary is an attempt to provide a consistent re-reading of
Romans on the basis of the new paradigm. This revised reading of
Romans resonates more with Anabaptist-Mennonite perspectives on
Christian faith and biblical interpretation than did the traditional
Protestant understandings, which privileged the individual over the
community. The person is valued indeed, but within the framework of
the corporate. Salvation is for all, Jews and Gentiles. Romans hammers home the point that this salvation is for all humans, Jews and
Gentiles, through Gods faithfulness and the faith(fulness) of Jesus the
Messiah/Christ.
The major literature on the new paradigm is found in the writings
of people like J. C. Beker, D. A. Campbell, W. S. Campbell, K. P.
Donfried, Neil Elliott, Mark Nanos, James Dunn, Richard Hays,
Robert Jewett, Mark Reasoner, E. P. Sanders, Krister Stendahl, S. K.
Stowers, James Walters, N. T. Wright (see bibliography for details).
Not all these writers agree on the faith of Jesus translation and interpretation, but the proposal to translate the phrase as a subjective genitive appeared in articles and commentaries decades before the key
points of the new perspective (E. P. Sanders, 1977, and J. D. G.
Dunn, 1983:95-112; 1990a:183-214) emerged in scholarship, as
described above.
Scripture cited in this commentary, as in other commentaries in
the Believers Church Bible Commentary Series, appears in italic style
and follows the NRSV, unless otherwise specified. However, in seeking to represent Pauls thought as precisely as possible, I have often
rendered my own translation (indicated in the text with JET trans.).
Hence, in this Romans commentary scriptural citations in italic are
either my own translation or from the NRSV. Translations from other
versions are so designated.
Romans 1:1-15
Introduction
PREVIEW
Normally Greek letters begin with a prescript, a thanksgiving, and a
disclosure formula. Paul follows this pattern in Romans. The Pauline
introductions, however, are expanded due to the addition of significant
theological content. The introduction to Romans is longer than any
other Pauline letter. Paul has never been to Rome, and cannot take it
for granted that he and his gospel will be accepted. Therefore, he
must introduce himself in a way that will persuade the readers to
accept and trust him. It is important that he create a positive relationship that will give him a hearing, and that will dispose the audience to
accept and act on his message.
Paul frames his introduction very carefully. He introduces himself,
his gospel, and his mission.
OUTLINE
Prescript, 1:1-7
Thanksgiving, 1:8-12
Disclosure Formula, 1:13-15
EXPLANATORY NOTES
Prescript 1:1-7
The prescript follows the structure common to ancient letters: author,
addressee, greeting.
37
38
Romans 1:1-15
1:1-6 Author
Paul introduces himself boldly by setting forth his credentials on the
model of the Old Testament prophets. He is a servant of Messiah
Jesus, called an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God. A servant
is literally a slave, a status most familiar to readers in Rome, but in this
case a person chosen by God for special service. The verb called
expresses divine calling in opposition to human self-appointment.
Apostle denotes an authorized agent or representative. Paul is a slave,
like many readers in his audience, who has been called to represent
God. Specifically, as he will say in v. 5, he has been called as an apostle to the Gentiles. Set apart or marked off is OT language for election to a specific ministry. The phrase would remind Pauls readers of
Jeremiah 1:5. The prophets discerned and proclaimed the intervention of God in human history. Paul is set apart to proclaim the good
news of Gods end-time (eschatological) intervention.
Having defined his own identity, Paul proceeds to define the
gospel that he proclaims. The gospel concerns the fulfillment of past
promises and the Messianic Son of God. Paul anchors it in Gods prior
history with Israel.
The gospel is about Gods Son, Messiah Jesus our Lord. Verses 34 are a very carefully composed confession of faith that is poetically
structured:
3a
concerning his Son
3b
who came about
3c
out of the seed of David
3d
according to the flesh
4a
who was appointed Son of God
4b
in power
4c
according to the Spirit of holiness
4d
out of the resurrection of the dead
4e
Messiah Jesus our Lord.
The confession also may be diagramed structurally as two parallel
verses centered in the phrase in power.
his Son
|
born
|
designated
|
Son of God
|
in power
|
from Davids seed
|
according to the flesh
|
according to the Spirit of holiness
|
from the resurrection of the dead
Romans 1:1-15
39
40
Romans 1:1-15
the beginning of the general resurrection. Early Christian apocalyptic thought linked the resurrection of Christ and the dawn of the
age of the general resurrection. Messiah Jesus is the first person to
rise from the dead; his resurrection makes possible the general resurrection. The language suggests the overlap of the ages [see the
earlier discussion of The Larger Thought World of Romans in the
Introduction to this commentary].
The one phrase that is without parallel in the confession, and
stands at the center of the confession, is in power. Jesus was
enthroned as Son of God in power by the end-time Spirit by means
of the resurrection. An act of end-time power is described. The evidence was the inauguration of the end-time resurrection of the dead.
The center of the confession is a statement about Spirit power that
enthrones Jesus as Son of God and Lord. The emphasis on power
attunes Pauls audience to what such power might mean and promise.
Paul answers that expectation at the outset by declaring that the
gospel is power, end-time power (1:16), and in his benediction by
asserting that hope abounds and the gospel is spread because of the
power of the Spirit (15:13, 19). Romans is about power; the letter is
bracketed by power language, particularly the confession of 1:4, the
theme of 1:16, and the benediction of 15:13, 19.
What is the function of the confession in Romans? An introduction is designed to introduce the author in an appealing way that will
lend credence to his concerns. It frequently also introduces topics to
be addressed in the letter. Of all Pauls letters only Romans includes
a confession in the introduction; it thus signals something important
for Paul and his audience. Paul introduces himself with a confessional statement designed to build common ground for the diverse
groups in the Roman churches. Its purpose is to be inclusive rather
than exclusive. It is not a litmus test of orthodoxy, but of the inclusiveness of the gospel. That is why the confession is grounded in
Israels Scriptures and is centered christologically. It confesses Jesus
as Messiah in two different ways. It emphasizes the end-time role of
the Spirit in the enthronement of Jesus as Son of God, and
describes the activity of the Spirit as the powerful inauguration of
the end-time resurrection of the dead. The confession introduces
themes that Paul will expand in addressing the pastoral issues in
Rome.
Pauls mission concerns the gospel of God that consists in a message about Jesus as the Messiah. He is the Son of God, the Davidic
Messiah, whose messiahship and sonship are validated by the resurrection. This theological confession also is a political statement. The
Romans 1:1-15
41
good news is about Jesus, not Caesar. Paul opens the letter by
addressing the seat of Roman power. He introduces Jesus as the
true king and savior of the whole world. Jesus alone is the Lord of
the world (see especially Elliott, 1994; Georgi, 1991; Horsley,
1997 and 2000).
Paul concludes Romans with a similar assertion (15:7-13). He
makes the case through a carefully constructed sequence of Scripture
passages that Messiah Jesus, from the root of Jesse, will rule the
Gentiles (15:12). The hope of the world is Jesus, not Caesar. Paul
frames Romans as a direct challenge to the imperial Roman proclamation that Caesar is the son of God and the ruler of the world.
Pauls third point in the prescript is to define his mission. Jesus
lordship is the basis of Pauls apostleship (v. 5), and the basis of his
right to address the Roman churches (v. 6). Paul has been gifted with
apostleship. Grace (charis), a favorite word for Paul, is rarely used in
Judaism. The Jews used mercy (eleos) to interpret Gods saving
activity. Paul replaces mercy with grace. He is the first early-Christian
theologian to use it in a technical way to interpret the meaning of salvation. Grace interprets Gods salvation as a gift that has nothing to
do with human activity. Likewise, the office of apostle is a gift undeserved by Paul.
The purpose of the gift of apostleship is to bring about the obedience of faith. Paul uses the same phrase again in 16:26 to describe
the purpose of his preaching. The phrase, unique to Romans, means
the obedience that consists in faith and the obedience that is the
product of faith. Faith and obedience are closely linked and interchangeable for Paul [Essays: Faith in Romans and Obedience].
Obedience is exercised only from faith, and faith becomes a reality
only in obedience. The phrase obedience of faith has an argumentative purpose in Romans. It marries the two watchwords of two major
groups in tension in Rome. Faith was the watchword of the Gentile
Christians, which they weakened by behavior without love.
Obedience, in turn, was the slogan of the Jewish Christians, which
they unhooked from faith. Furthermore, against the backdrop of
faiths obedience in Jewish literature, it carries one other meaning.
The covenant faithfulness of Gods people Israel is now a possibility
without assuming the identity of that people. To make the purpose of
his apostleship faith which is obedience unifies the two people and
the two theologies that are in tension among the house churches of
Rome. There is one people of God that expresses obedience through
faith and faith through obedience.
The purpose of Pauls mission among all the Gentiles (nations) is
42
Romans 1:1-15
1:7b Greetings
In the ancient world a letters opening regularly concluded with a
greeting, such as be glad or good day. Paul changes the greeting
formula. His greeting typically contains four elements: a wish (grace),
the recipient (to you), a wish (peace), and a divine source (from God
our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ). The use of grace (charis) in a
greeting is without parallel. Peace (shalom) is the standard Hebrew
greeting. The phrase grace and peace is a specifically Pauline creation (Lieu). Paul combines his distinctive theological term grace
with the Hebrew peace greeting to form his own religious greeting.
Another Pauline creation is the addition of the divine source of the
greeting. Paul proclaims to the churches of Rome the gifts of salvation
made available by God through Messiah Jesus.
Romans 1:1-15
43
Thanksgiving 1:8-12
Paul elaborates the traditional thanksgiving formula into a formal literary pattern in all his letters except Galatians. The thanksgiving formula in Romans is clearly defined. It begins with the principle clause
of thanksgiving to God in v. 8 and concludes with v. 12. Verse 13
begins another text unit, as indicated by the use of the disclosure formula, I want you to know. The thanksgiving formula contains four
parts: 1) the thanksgiving; 2) an oath; 3) a prayer sigh; and 4) the reasons. The thanksgiving continues to build the positive relationship
begun in the prescript.
1:9 An Oath
Paul introduces God as a witness that he regularly intercedes for the
churches in Rome. Unable to prove it from a distance, Paul invokes
God to underline his deep concern. He links Gods witness role to a
statement about the nature of his own ministry, which is a service
offered to God. In both the LXX and the NT service (latreu) is exclusively religious service offered either to the one true God or to pagan
gods. For Paul it denotes all service that Christians offer to God. In
v. 9 this service is defined specifically as the preaching of the gospel.
The language here is parallel to 15:16, where Paul describes himself
as a servant of Messiah Jesus who renders a priestly service by presenting to God the offering which the Gentile converts make.
44
Romans 1:1-15
Romans 1:1-15
45
The Pattern
Running through the thanksgiving and disclosure formula and into
the thesis statement is a pattern of argument designed to embrace
the Roman Christians. Three times Paul asserts his desire to visit
Rome and each time he gives the reasons for these intentions.
Vv. 9-10 IntentionPauls prayer to visit Rome
Vv. 11-12 Reasonto impart a spiritual gift, to be strengthened
Vv. 13a IntentionPauls long-standing desire to visit Rome
Vv. 13b-14 Reasonto reap some harvest among the Gentiles
V. 15 IntentionPauls long-standing eagerness
Vv. 16-18 Reasonthe power of the gospel
46
Romans 1:1-15
1:1, 6
1:8
1:8-10
1:1, 5f., 8-17
1:5
1:1
1:9
1:5, 13
1:14-15
15:14ff.
15:14
15:30
15:15-33
15:15
15:16
15:23, 31
15:16
15:27
1:5
1:10, 11, 13, 15
1:11
1:10
1:10, 13
1:16
1:1, 9, 15, 16
1:16
1:7
1:13
1:14
15:18
15:22, 23, 24, 28, 29, 32
15:29
15:32
15:22
15:17
15:16, 19, 20
15:19 (2x)
15:33
15:28
15:27
Romans 1:1-15
47
The basic meaning of the word is good news (to tell the good
news in the verb form, or the content of the good news in the noun
form). It is used in Greco-Roman literature to announce the good
news of a military victory, or the accession of a new emperor, or the
coming of the emperor to a community, or the birth of an heir to the
emperor. For example, the accession of Augustus as Roman emperor
is announced in 9 B.C., just a few years before the birth of Jesus, as
follows:
The providence which has ordered the whole of our life . . . has ordained
the most perfect consummation for human life by giving to it Augustus,
by filling him with virtue for doing the work of a benefactor among men,
and by sending him, as it were, a saviour for us and those who come after
us, to make war to cease, to create order everywhere . . . the birthday of
the god [Augustus] was the beginning for the world of the glad tidings
[gospel] that have come to men (sic) through him.
48
Romans 1:1-15
Sea or Qumran Scrolls. The Melchizedek Scroll uses two texts from
Isaiah, 52:7 and 61:1 (11Q13), to describe the good news as the
eschatological liberation of the community from the domination of evil
powers through the agency of a heavenly being.
Paul interprets the meaning of Jesus in continuity with this eschatological understanding of good news from Isaiah and Qumran.
Gospel expresses in summary fashion the message that Paul
announced to the world. It is his way of summing up the significance
of the Jesus-event, and the meaning of the lordship of Jesus for
human history. That Paul can use the term absolutely (at least 23
times) indicates that the term was already familiar to his readers.
The content and authorship of the gospel is stated succinctly by
Paul. It is the gospel of God (Rom. 1:1; 15:16; 1 Thess. 2:2, 8;
2 Cor. 11:7), the gospel of Christ (1 Thess. 3:2; Gal. 1:7; Phil. 1:27;
1 Cor. 9:12; 2 Cor. 2:12; 9:13; 10:14; Rom. 15:19), the gospel of
our Lord Jesus (2 Thess. 1:8), and the gospel of his Son (Rom. 1:9).
The genitive of in each of these phrases indicates both content and
authorship. The gospel is from God and about God, from Messiah
Jesus and about Messiah Jesus. My gospel is unique to Romans (2:16;
16:25). It is a polemical framing of the gospel that stands over against
other understandings of the good news.
Paul characterizes this gospel in various ways. It is promissory,
having been promised by the prophets of Israel (Rom. 1:2). The
gospel fulfills the promises of God. Second, it is revelatory, revealing
the righteousness and wrath of God (1:17-18). It demonstrates for the
world the reality of the new age. Third, the gospel is powerful, the
power of God for salvation (1:16). It unleashes Gods end-time power
in history to effect salvation. Fourth, the gospel is universal. It is for
everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek
(1:16). Finally, the gospel is normative. There is only one gospel (Gal.
1:7). People are expected to listen to it (Eph. 1:13), to welcome it
(2 Cor. 11:4), to obey it (2 Thess. 1:8; Rom. 10:16). Those who
diverge from it are to be corrected so that they may walk straight
according to the truth of the gospel (Gal. 2:14).
The gospel is defined at the beginning of Romans as the
announcement that Jesus is the Messianic King. He alone brings
peace, righteousness, and salvation. This good news is at the same
time a declaration that Caesar is not King, that Caesar does not bring
real peace, that Caesar is not Savior.
Romans 1:1-15
49
Gospel
Romans centers the gospel in Messiah Jesus. Pauls own identity, the
center of the gospel, the driving force of his mission, the hallmark of
the churchs confession is Messiah Jesus. In a world where things fall
apart, the center does not hold, Paul offers a bold claim. The people
of God must be centered in the gospel of Messiah Jesus. Jesus, not
Caesar, is Lord and King.
The gospel is first and foremost about a person, Messiah Jesus
manifesting Gods reign. It is the good news that God is with us in
and through Messiah Jesus. What does it mean for the church in the
post-modern West to proclaim and to live the good news? What does
it mean for the church in the East and the South to be centered in the
gospel? To what does the gospel say no in these cultures? What
does the gospel stand over against? The gospel means that salvation
and politics must be redefined in terms of Jesus as Messiah and Lord.
The gospel that Jesus is Messiah always involves fulfillment, new
beginnings, new definitions of identity, and new obligations. The
gospel is always two things at the same time, fulfillment and newness.
It is about God keeping promises to bring redemption to humanity and
to the world. It involves the beginning of a new era in history. That
newness is identified most strikingly in this text as the beginning of the
end-time resurrection of the dead.
This calls for a complete redefinition of group identity. The gospel
is not for a few people, or a select group of elect people. The fulfillment of promises to the chosen people through Jesus involves
redrawing the boundaries to include everyone. The gospel is inclusive,
not exclusive. It is for all the nations, for all people. The saints now
include Jews and Gentiles, Greeks and barbarians, wise and
mindless, ethnic people of all tribes rather than just one. How does
the gospel shape the churchs identity today? Who is everyone in a
post-modern world?
Romans 1:16-18
Romans 1:16-18
51
one who is faithful (v. 16), by means of faithfulness for the purpose of faithfulness (v. 17), the righteous one lives by means of
faithfulness (v. 17). The term faith represents a major translation
issue. In English there is a difference between someone who is faithful and someone who believes. The first means to keep faith with
a promise or commitment, the latter to believe in someone or something. English lacks a verb to faith. The word Paul uses here and
throughout Romans really means to be faithful, rather than to
believe. Paul explains the meaning of this language as the letter proceeds [Essay: Faith in Romans].
Although vv. 16-18 state the thesis of the letter, they are also transitional; they are linked to what precedes and what follows. The statement of thesis tells us why Paul is eager to preach the gospel in Rome.
He is eager (v. 15) because:
he is not ashamed of the gospel (v. 16a);
the gospel is the power of God for the salvation of all peoples
(v. 16b);
the gospel reveals the righteousness of God (v. 17);
the gospel reveals the wrath of God against all sin (v. 18); and
people know about God (v. 19).
Not only are vv. 16-18 transitional, but they also formally introduce the first text unit of the argument. Verse 16 opens with for
not, and 2:11, the concluding verse of the first major text unit of the
argument, begins with for not. Paul is not ashamed of the gospel
for not is there a distinction between peoples in the gospel.
OUTLINE
The Thesis, 1:16
The Explanation, 1:17-18
1:17 The gospel reveals the righteousness of God
1:18 The gospel reveals the wrath of God
EXPLANATORY NOTES
52
Romans 1:16-18
Honor-Shame Language
The Roman world was an honor-shame culture, not a guilt-forgiveness
culture [Essay: Honor-Shame]. Society was ordered according to a
strict social status ladder that defined a hierarchy of honor. To violate
the social order was to be shamed. I am not ashamed of the gospel
is addressing questions of honor and shame in a caste society, a major
theme in Romans (e.g., 1:21, 22, 24, 26, 31; 2:7, 19, 23; 6:21;
9:33; 10:11; 12:10; 13:7; 14:6). Christians among the Roman
churches are ashamed of each other. They are calling each other
names, like circumcised penis and foreskin (ch. 2), weak and
strong (chs. 14-15), because they do not believe the gospel redefines social and religious status.
Pauls advice here, and in chs. 2, 14-15, is shocking to a society
ordered by a hierarchy of honor. To say that circumcision is meaningless is revolutionary for both Jews and Romans, or to ask the
strong to bear the weak, even to welcome them, is very problematic in a caste culture. For the strong to accept the weak is to make
them equals and therefore to lose honor for themselves. To accept
people from a different rung of the status ladder violates the standard
social boundaries.
So to begin the thesis statement with I am not ashamed of the
gospel is to assert at the outset that Paul expects the gospel to disrupt
the established values of an honor-shame society. Pauls opening
statement is polemical. He is arguing a point.
Romans 1:16-18
53
Salvation
The power of God creates salvation (steria). In Hellenistic Greek and
in the Septuagint (LXX), the Greek translation of the OT, salvation
means deliverance from danger and death. It also is used in the LXX
to describe Gods great deliverances of Israel, e.g., the Exodus and the
release from Babylonian captivity. This meaning was intensified in
Jewish apocalyptic literature where it means Gods end-time deliverance of Israel from the powers of Satan, death, and final judgment.
That future power of deliverance is already present and operative in
history through the death and resurrection of Messiah Jesus. That is
why Paul is so confident in preaching his gospel. The gospel will effect
end-time deliverance already now from whatever form of bondage
exists in the church.
The gospel is the end-time power of salvation to everyone [who
is] being faithful. The word everyone introduces another central
theme of Romans, the universal scope of Gods salvation. Everyone
is more than a positive assertion; it is another polemical statement.
The gospel includes all people. All or everyone (pas) occurs 71 times
in Romans. It is used 25 times in such weighty expressions as salvation to everyone who believes (1:16), all have sinned (3:23), that he
might have mercy on all (11:32), and five times with Jews and
Gentiles (1:16; 2:9, 10; 3:9; 10:12). Paul is addressing partisans in
Rome who are drawing the circle of inclusion too narrowly. The
54
Romans 1:16-18
Romans 1:16-18
55
promises to Israel by including the Gentiles in this people. Pauls concern is the end-time ordering of the world according to the covenant
and the promises to Abraham.
The verb revealed describes the disclosure of end-time and cosmic
secrets that are hidden from human beings. The tense of the verb is
present, is being revealed. A continuous revelation is taking place in
the gospel. Pauls point in v. 17 is that an end-time, world-transforming
revelation of Gods righteousness is taking place now through the gospel.
Habakkuk 2:4
The phrase by means of faithfulness for the purpose of faithfulness
(ek pistes eis pistin) must be understood on the basis of the quotation from Habakkuk 2:4 which follows it. Paul uses the specific phrase
from faithfulness to faithfulness (ek pistes eis pistin) only in the
two letters that quote the Habakkuk 2:4 text, but it is used 21 times
in these letters so it is clearly an important concept. The phrase is best
interpreted as translated above, by means of Gods faithfulness for the
purpose of humanitys faith. God takes the initiative. Human beings
respond. Human faith is not a precondition for the revelation of Gods
righteousness, but a response to it.
Paul cites Habakkuk 2:4b, as it is written, the righteous one shall
live by faithfulness, in confirmation of v. 17a. Two critical issues
affect the translation and interpretation of this citation. The first is the
referent of the righteous one (ho dikaios). Traditional Protestant
interpretation reads the phrase to mean the person who is declared
righteous because he/she has responded in faith to Gods revelation.
But the phrase can also be understood as referring to the Messiah.
The righteous one is the Messiah in the LXX of Habakkuk, and in
a Jewish tradition of interpreting that text as a messianic prophecy.
Other Jewish writings and the early church make the same identification (see 1 En. 38:2; 53:6; Acts 3:14; 7:52; 22:14; 1 Pet. 3:18;
1 John 2:1, 29, 3:7). The righteous one in 1 Enoch is the instrument of Gods saving and judging power. He also is called the Son
of Man, and is glorified by God. In Peters speech in Acts 3:14 the
righteous one is the person God raised from the dead and glorified.
His coming fulfills Gods promises to Israel. In Stephens speech in
Acts 7, the righteous one is the Son of Man whose coming was
prophesied beforehand (the same word as in Rom. 1:2) whom God
now has exalted. The righteous one in Pauls speech in Acts 22:14
is linked with an apocalyptic vision and a commissioning to be a witness of Jesus as Messiah to the nations.
Each of these references to the righteous one appears in apoc-
56
Romans 1:16-18
alyptic contexts. The Enoch and Acts 3:14 and 7:52 references are
associated with another messianic title, Son of Man, suggesting a
common messianic understanding of both titles. All of the Acts references associate the righteous one with the fulfillment of Gods
promises to Israel. The fact that all the Acts speeches that use this
term occur before Jewish audiences suggests its common messianic
connotation in some groups within first century Judaism. The 1 Peter
3:18 reference, which many believe is based on Isaiah 53:10-12, similarly links suffering unjustly to vindication and exaltation by God. The
1 John 2:1 reference is similar to the mention in 1 Peterthe righteous one makes atonement for the unrighteous. The righteous one
in Romans 1:17 is likely a reference to the Messiah. The case for this
reading is strengthened by the fact that both in Romans and in the
other letters of Paul when the righteous one is used absolutely (not
as a generic reference) it refers either to God, Christ, or the law, and
never to human beings (in Romans see 2:13 and 5:7 for its reference
to generic good people; 3:26 for reference God; 5:19 for reference
to the ones made righteous through the obedient one; 7:12 for a
description of the law). The Messiah, not human beings who trust in
Jesus, is the confirmation of the end-time, world-transforming revelation of the righteousness of God (see D. Campbell, 1994b; Dodd,
1995; Hays, 1989b; Zorn, 1998).
The majority of modern translations give two readings of the
Habakkuk quotation. The text usually reads, he who through faith is
righteous shall live. The footnote gives an alternative reading, The
righteous (one) shall live by faith (but see the NIV and the NRSV for
this reading in the text). The translation in the footnote or the NIV and
NRSV is the reading in all first century Jewish texts and interpretations.
The emphasis is on the righteous one living out of faithfulness. It seems
best to follow the common pattern of the first century. The point of the
passage is its reference to faithfulness rather than righteousness.
But the question remains, whose faithfulness? The Hebrew text,
the LXX, which Paul is quoting, and the Dead Sea Scrolls talk about
the faithfulness of God, not the faith response of humans. The issue
in Habakkuk is the faithfulness of God in the face of Chaldean oppression. In Habakkuk 2 the contrast is the self-assertion and boastfulness
of the Chaldeans versus the faithfulness of God in whom the faithful
Israelite trusts and stands firm. Paul omits the pronoun my from the
Hebrew form of the Habakkuk quotation because of his messianic
understanding of the righteous one. The righteousness of God is
revealed by the faithfulness of God. The confirmation of that thesis is
that the Messiah lived out of the faithfulness of God.
Romans 1:16-18
57
Romans 3:22
The righteousness of God
continues to be manifested
(revealed)
through the faithfulness of Messiah
Jesus
to all who are faithful.
The good news of the gospel is that God is effecting end-time, world
transformation through the Son, Messiah Jesus. Human beings may
receive this good news and be transformed by it, but they do not
reveal or effect it.
58
Romans 1:16-18
pretation. The present tense of the verb in v. 18 has the same force
as in v. 17. An end-time revelation is currently taking place.
The content of this revelation is the wrath of God (org theou).
The phrase describes the nature of God as revealed in Gods activities.
It is another OT term that describes Gods reaction to sin within the
covenant relationship [Essay: Wrath]. This wrath is revealed from
heaven, a stereotyped Jewish phrase indicating the source of the
wrath. The wrath is really Gods wrath.
The point of v. 18 is that the end-time wrath of God is now being
revealed in the world through the gospel just as the end-time righteousness of God is being revealed. It is being revealed now, in contrast to a Jewish emphasis on its future manifestation, though it will
be revealed fully in the future. The wrath of God has both a present
and a future dimension just as does the righteousness of God.
The linkage of Gods righteousness and wrath in the thesis statement of the letter is important. The close relation of Gods salvation
and judgment, righteousness and wrath, is firmly rooted in the OT and
Jewish literature. Salvation history moves toward Gods consummate
act of salvation, but there is always a corresponding movement toward
Gods ultimate judgment of disobedience and sin. This is expressed
both in Gods faithfulness to the covenantGod saves and judges the
covenant peopleand in the picture of God as a holy warrior: God
does battle to save Israel and to defeat their enemies.
The placement of the Habakkuk quotation between the statements
about the revelation of Gods righteousness and Gods wrath is significant. The Messiah in Jewish end-time expectation brings both salvation
for the righteous and judgment for the wicked. The Habakkuk quotation
as a messianic reference bonds vv. 17 and 18 together. God is revealing, and will reveal fully, divine righteousness and wrath in the gospel of
Messiah Jesus. That revelation does not take place in the human
response to the gospel, but in and through the faithfulness of Jesus.
The object of the wrath of God is all ungodliness and unrighteousness of people the ones suppressing the truth in unrighteousness. A single all embraces ungodliness and unrighteousness.
The two words together offer a complete description of sin.
Ungodliness focuses sin as an attack on the holiness and majesty of
God. Unrighteousness defines sin as a violation of Gods just order in
the world. Both stand opposed to the righteousness of God, and both
are characterized as assaults on the truth. They hold down or bind
the truth. The word often is associated with demonic forces that bind
and oppress. The phrase who bind the truth by means of unrighteousness is a profound description of the nature of sin, which will be
Romans 1:16-18
59
Righteousness
The language of Pauls thesis statement is rich in biblical history and
meaning. It is covenant language that pictures Gods relation to Israel,
and Israels relation to God and to fellow members of the community.
Righteousness in relation to God in the OT usually refers to Gods
saving action, especially in Psalms and Isaiah 40-66. It describes
Gods saving action directed toward the well-being (shalom) of Israel.
When righteousness (tsedekah) is used in relationship to Israel or
individual people it most often is linked with justice (mishpat) to
describe the appropriate conduct of the people in response to Gods
saving actions. The word-pair is concerned with the proper ordering
of life in every sphere of human activity.
The basic Old Testament meanings are continued in the intertestamental literature, where righteousness describes the saving activity
of God as well as denotes appropriate ethical conduct toward God and
fellow Jews.
Righteousness language is quite limited in the gospels. The verb
occurs only seven times, the noun 10 times. Many have, therefore,
concluded that righteousness was not a major concern of Jesus or the
writers of the gospels. But that conclusion is not warranted. In fact,
Jesus life and ministry provided the basis for the early Christian
understanding of righteousness.
Jesus proclamation of the reign of God could not be understood
in first century Judaism without thinking of Gods righteousness that
characterizes this reign. The Psalms that proclaim Gods kingship
(e.g., 97, 98, 99) also declare Gods righteousness. Intertestamental
literature links the reign of God and the righteousness of God. The
parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector (Luke 18:9-14) extends
the OT picture of God forgiving the sinner (e.g., Ps. 51; Ezra 9:6-15;
Neh. 9:9-37; Dan. 9:4-18) to Jesus ministry. Jesus practice of table
fellowship with tax collectors and sinners dramatically illustrates this
understanding. It also fulfills the prediction of 1 Enoch 62:14 that the
Son of Man will bring righteousness and salvation by the practice of
60
Romans 1:16-18
Romans 1:16-18
61
God Is Righteous
What difference does this interpretation make? It fundamentally alters
the interpretation of the righteousness of God and of Romans,
because at least three implications follow from it. First, it centers the
righteousness of God in Gods end-time and saving activity. The traditional Protestant interpretation centered the righteousness of God in
what was given for human beings and brought about by human faith.
The proposed interpretation centers the righteousness of God theologically. God is the righteous one who reveals this righteousness in
and for the entire cosmos. This revelation is brought about by Gods
action in Messiah Jesus. Furthermore, the righteousness of God
addresses primarily the question of personal and national purpose and
the incorporation of new people into the people of God. Individual sin
and guilt are addressed later, but always through the corporate lens set
forth in this thesis statement.
62
Romans 1:16-18
Romans 1:16-18
63
Socio-Political Implication
The announcement that the righteousness of God is revealed through
the faithfulness of Jesus for the salvation of all people is more than a
theological statement to address a pastoral problem among the
Romans churches. It also is a bold political statement, what in fact Neil
Elliott has called an ideological intifada (N. Elliott, 1994:190), aimed
at the seat of Roman power and its imperial claims. Roman imperial
propaganda makes the case in every way possibledecrees, coins,
golden tablets, statues, images, festivalsthat Augustus, the Roman
emperor, has restored the faith of the Roman people by bringing
righteousness (ius), salvation (steria), and peace (eirn) to all
the people of the world. The Roman emperor alone is the savior of
the world.
Pauls gospel makes a competing claim to the gospel of Caesar.
The good news is that righteousness, the righteousness of God, is
being revealed in the world for the salvation of all people through
Messiah Jesus. Paul engages the kingship debate of the Roman
64
Romans 1:16-18
empire by asserting that Jesus is King, the Messianic son of God who
alone brings salvation by revealing the righteousness of God.
The gospel is simultaneously a religious and a political claim. Real
salvation can only be effected by the true king, Messiah Jesus.
Romans 1:1815:13
The Argument of
the Letter
66
Romans 1:183:20
68
Romans 1:183:20
Romans 1:183:20
69
70
Romans 1:183:20
Gods Reaction
Moral Consequences
v. 24therefore (dio)
God gave them up
v. 24impurity, dishonoring
of bodies
v. 25who (hoitenes)
exchanged (metallass) v. 26therefore (dio)
God gave them up
v. 28they not thinking
fit to know God
v. 28just as (kaths)
God gave them up
Romans 1:183:20
v. 32who (hoitenes)
know the just judgment
of God
2:1therefore (dio)
no excuse
71
2:1-3judge yourself,
judgment of God
72
Romans 1:183:20
in 1:18-32, but does the same things. People who judge others for
wrongdoing but do wrong themselves are really judging themselves.
Their punishment is the end-time judgment of God (to krima tou
theou in 2:2). The issue is the discrepancy between the imaginary
questioners claim to a higher morality and actual practice. The condemnation will serve as a precedent when Paul moves on in 2:17-29
to use the diatribe again to condemn the same kind of discrepancy
among Jews who claim to know the law, but do not observe it.
The last unit, 1:32-2:3, is seen as the fourth part of the sequence,
despite the change of tone and the form of the direct address in 2:1,
for four reasons: 1) the form of the argument, introduced by whoever in v. 32, followed by the identification of the sin in v. 32, and the
declaration of the judgment with therefore; 2) the content of the argument is that God recompenses according to peoples actions; 3) the
heavy use of doing wordsthe ones doing such things, doing
them, and those doing in 1:32, the same things doing in 2:1, the
ones doing such things in 2:2, 3, and doing these things in 2:3; 4)
the prominence of judgment (krin) wordsseven times in 2:1-3. The
introduction of the diatribe form or the direct address in 2:1 does not
necessitate the beginning of a new argument, but serves to concretize
and sharpen the indictment of 1:18-32 (see Stowers, 1981).
Several things are noteworthy in this section. First, the critical
human sin is the rejection of God: not give glory to God in v. 21,
reject the glory of God in v. 23, deny the truth of God in v. 25, reject
knowledge of God in v. 28. Second, broken relationships with God
lead to broken relationships with fellow human beings. As in Genesis,
man and woman reject God, and then each other. Third, the language
of Gods judgment is covenantal. God responds to human failure by
turning away. Humanity rebels against God, who then abandons
humanity and does not protect humans against themselves. Fourth,
Paul reverses the normal understanding of cause and consequence.
Moral perversion is the result of Gods wrath, not the reason for it.
Fifth, the consequences of rebellion against God are social and relational rather than religious. Perverted relationships and chaos in the
social order result from rejecting God. Sixth, people become like what
they worship. Substituting the creature for the Creator means that
people become more creaturely, more animal-like, even bestial.
The language throughout is honor-shame [Essay: HonorShame]. The impiety (asebeian), the unrighteous behavior (adikia)
and the suppression of the truth (aletheian en adikia) in 1:18 result
in uncleanness (akatharsia) in 1:24, dishonor (atimazesthai and
atimia) in 1:24 and 26, and indecency (aschemosune) in 1:27. All
Romans 1:183:20
73
74
Romans 1:183:20
Romans 1:183:20
75
cerned with the wrong judgment of people against each other (see
Meeks, 1987). The middle of the first argument asserts that God
judges people who hypocritically judge fellow human beings. The letter concludes (14:115:13) with an exhortation that Christians are not
to judge fellow Christians who are different, but are to welcome each
other. A distinct literary form, known as an inclusio (or parentheses),
reminds the Roman Christians that there is no ground for passing
judgment on one another.
THE TEXT IN BIBLICAL CONTEXT
76
Romans 1:183:20
ing their slaves well. Colossians 3:22-25 uses it to make exactly the
opposite point. Slaves should work obediently for their masters,
because God is impartial; justice will be done in the future judgment.
First Peter 1:17 characterizes God as the impartial judge (literally, the
non-face showing judge) to exhort holy living.
Impartiality is the ground for Gods righteousness. Because this
righteousness excludes partiality, God judges all people and makes
righteous all people without distinction. Therefore, people are
called to live justly without regard for the ethnic identity or social status of others.
TEXT IN THE LIFE OF THE CHURCH
Romans 1:183:20
77
78
Romans 1:183:20
are the normative context for intimate sexual love. Paul, following
Jesus, understood the creation accounts to mean that the one flesh
of marriage and sexuality is limited to the relationship of a man and a
woman. Sexual intercourse is not the definition of wholeness as
human beings. Celibate people can be fully human and whole. Sexual
intercourse is a definition of what it means to be married, not what it
means to be human.
In all probability, Paul would say that gay and lesbian people
should not be sexually active just as single heterosexual people should
not be sexually active. He would say no to homosexual behavior. He
would call people who have a same-sex orientation or preference to
the celibate life, just like he called single heterosexual people to the
celibate life. The celibate life is a high and noble calling in the church.
Paul, would go on, I think, to say that the church, having said no
and having called these Christians to celibacy, should be loving, caring, compassionate, and just in dealing with practicing homosexual
people, just like it is in dealing with people guilty of other sexual sins
(see Swartley, 2003, for an extensive discussion of homosexuality and
the church).
If my reading of Pauls counsel is anywhere close to correct, what
should we do with it in the church today? I think we should take it seriously. But, I also think, the church needs to keep thinking theologically about what it means that all people are fallen. Because we are
fallen, we do not live up to the ideals and normative models taught in
the Scriptures. The church understands that divorce and remarriage
violates the normative model of a monogamous marital relationship.
But the church has learned to be forgiving and inclusive of divorced
and remarried people. What does that mean for the way the church
deals with committed gay and lesbian couples? In addition, the church
also needs to think about the reality of alternative marital arrangements in the biblical tradition, which go beyond the model of a
monogamous relationship of one man and one woman (e.g., the practice of polygamy in Israel). Are some patterns of relationship so pervasive in a culture that the church must learn to live with them for a
time even if they fall short of the normative pattern? These are questions, I suggest, the church should talk about in the spirit of Romans
1415: not judging, but bearing one another, focusing on the center, and continuing to discern together the boundaries in fidelity to
Scripture and the Spirits leading.
Romans 1:183:20
79
80
Romans 1:183:20
Romans 1:183:20
81
82
Romans 1:183:20
have the law do by nature what the law requires. These translations
then interpret Paul as saying that the Gentiles do the things required
by Gods law as a result of their possession of natural law. It is preferable, however, to connect by nature to the preceding phrase, and
read Gentiles who do not have the law by nature occasionally do
what the law requires (nature is associated with words that precede
rather than follow in Pauls letters). The Gentiles do not possess the
law by nature, that is, by virtue of their birth into a community that
has the Mosaic Law. But they occasionally live consistently with the
teachings of the law (the genitive is a partitive, they obey part of the
law part of the time). The Gentiles know the law and can perform it.
In fact, they demonstrate that the work of the law is written in their
hearts. Works of the law (plural) are always negative in Paul [Essay:
Works of the Law]. The singular work of the law refers to the essential unity of the laws requirements. This work of the law occurs in the
inner person. The phrase explains how the Gentiles are a law to
themselves, even though they do not possess the law. They have a
deep and wholehearted desire to do the essentials of the law.
Pauls first point about the Gentiles is that they have access to the
essential moral requirement of the law and they occasionally do the
law. Put a period at the end of v. 15a. The law gives the Jews no special advantage. In addition, Paul credits the Gentiles with conscience;
they are aware of the wrongness of what they have done. Paul pictures them at the final judgment as people who try to avoid actions
that would arouse their conscience. Their conflicting thoughts about
good and evil as they face judgment is evidence of moral sensitivity.
The language in vv. 15b-16 is legal. The scene is the final judgment,
where Jews claimed they would have special advantages, because they
had two advocates, the Torah and the commandments, to speak in
their behalf. Paul argues that the Gentiles also have two advocates,
the law and conscience. Jews and Gentiles are equal in the final judgment when God will disclose the secrets of all peoples hearts. The
measure of that final judgment will be Messiah Jesus, not Enoch,
Melchizedek, or other heroic figures in Jewish speculation about who
would assist God in the final judgment.
Romans 1:183:20
83
Gentiles in the moral contents of the law. The text consists of two
halves, vv. 17-20 and 21-23, with v. 24 providing a conclusion. The
text is structured into groups of five components:
Jewish Privilege
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
The Reality
[1] you teach others
[1] do you fail to teach yourself?
[2] you who preach not to steal [2] do you not steal?
[3] you say not to commit
[3] do you not commit adultery?
adultery
[4] you who despise idols
[4] do you rob temples?
[5] you who boast in the law
[5] do you not dishonor God by
breaking the law?
For, as it is written, The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles
because of you.
The text begins with a list of Jewish privileges and claims. The second list outlines what the Jew hopes to be and do for others because
of those claims. The qualities and roles in the lists have scriptural
antecedents and parallels in contemporary Jewish literature. The final
list pictures the gap between the self-understanding and the practice.
The final or fifth element in the lists mentions the law. Who is a
Jew? Paul says he/she is a person defined by the lawmentioned
four times: resting upon the law (v. 17), instructed from the law
(v. 18), having the embodiment of knowledge and truth in the law
(v. 20), you boast in the law (v. 23). The law is the symbol of privileged status over against the Gentiles. Because of it, Jews boast in
God. Boasting is negative, because it involves nationalistic exclusiveness that says God is exclusively the God of the people of the law,
the Jews (cf. 3:27-29).
The accusing questions in vv. 21-23 stand in the prophetic tradition of rebuke and exhortation. The striking similarity of the specific
charges with accusations against Jews in contemporary Jewish litera-
84
Romans 1:183:20
ture (e.g., Pss. Sol. 8:8-13; T. Levi 14; CD 4:12-17; 8:4-10; Philo
Conf. 163) suggests that Paul is using an established rhetorical form.
He is not saying anything new or anti-Jewish. The Jews break the
very law in which they boast. The problem is discrepancy between
profession and practice. Pauls point is not that the law is unfulfillable,
or that the Jews are uniquely culpable, but that they are accountable
to God for disobeying the law.
The emphasis on Israels role in leading and proselytizing the
nations forms the background for the climactic charge in v. 24 (the
quotation is from Isa. 52:5 and Ezek. 36:20). The actual behavior of
the Jews causes Gods name to be blasphemed among the Gentiles.
The mission of Judaism is to glorify Gods name among the nations,
but the combination of knowledge without practice results in alienating the Gentiles.
The contrast is between national pride in possessing the law, the
sure and certain sign of Gods favor, and transgression of the law,
which dishonors God before the Gentiles. The law confers no special
advantage to those who merely possess it. The Jews are as guilty as
the Gentiles.
Romans 1:183:20
85
Romans (11 out of 19 in Paul, 20 in the NT). Paul addresses the controversy by arguing that Gentiles who keep the law are also circumcised persons. Name-calling based on physical circumcision is inappropriate. Obedience is what counts.
Paul draws on earlier arguments in the four test cases to establish
the equality of Jews and Gentiles. Both law and circumcision have
been defined too narrowly as badges of national identity, which end
up preventing the fulfillment of Gods purpose in the law. Both are
redefined strictly in terms of performance, obedience, which eliminates them as the special privilege of the Jews. Gentiles can and do
meet this criterion.
86
Romans 1:183:20
Romans 1:183:20
87
Pauls argument is both old and new. The problem of Jewish disobedience of the law is a long-term concern of the laws teachers and
the Scriptures. Circumcision of the heart is a scriptural theme, as
well, found also in contemporary Jewish literature. Even the notion
that disobedient Jews will be judged by Gentiles who keep the law
occurs in contemporary Judaism.
At the same time, Paul makes some radical moves. Circumcision
is more than the equivalent of law observance in Judaism. It is the distinctive physical sign of belonging to Abrahams family. To assert that
Gentiles could be counted as circumcised by keeping the law is an
astonishing claim. Even more radical is Pauls transformation of the
both . . . and of v. 25 (circumcision and law observance) to the not
. . . but of vv. 28-29, (not fleshly circumcision but heart circumcision). While the latter does not exclude the former, the importance
of fleshly circumcision as a distinctive marker of theological and sociological identity becomes less important. The threefold antitheses in
vv. 28-29 further redefine circumcision as that which God effects by
the Spirit rather than as a physical marking of identity.
Paul is not making a case against the law or Judaism, but for the
impartiality of God with all people. But he also argues theologically for
removing age-old distinctions that gave Israel an exclusive and exalted
status with God. And socially Paul rejects the identity and boundary
markers that separated Israel from the nations, Jewish Christians from
Gentile Christians. The argument raises questions about circumcision
and Jewish identity, which are discussed in 3:1-8.
88
Romans 1:183:20
easily leads to the conclusion that Israels sin has made the gifts of the
law and circumcision ineffective. The result is that, if God is righteous
as the impartial judge, God cannot also be righteous as the covenant
savior of Israel. The Jew is no better off than the Gentile; election and
covenant are meaningless. This conclusion raises profound questions
about God for Jews, Jewish Christians and Gentiles sympathetic with
the Jewish faith.
Paul uses the diatribe form to engage an imaginary partner with
questions concerning God. Paul addresses two seemingly inconsistent
ideas: 1) Gods impartiality to Jews and Gentiles; 2) Gods faithfulness
to the covenant promises to Israel. The first point questions the advantage of being Jewish. To answer the question negatively would be bad
politics; it would offend Jewish nationalism, which is part of the background of the letter. But even more important, a negative answer
would be bad theology, for it would question the truthfulness of the
Jewish Scriptures and the faithfulness of God. The issue is how can
the doctrine of Gods impartiality be reconciled with the scriptural
proclamation of Gods faithfulness to the covenant promises?
Furthermore, if God is faithful to the promises, does the Jew not
have an advantage after all? Paul seeks to demonstrate from the law
that Jews as a people are sinners (the language concerns peoplehood
or people groups, not individuals), and thereby demonstrate that the
law does not separate them from Gentile sinners. The law places both
groups, in fact, the whole world, under the judgment of God. Jewish
security, based on the possession of the law, is undermined. The Jew
has no advantage in respect to judgment, because allJew and
Gentileare under sin. The string of Scripture citations proves this.
The those in the law (tois en t nom) in v. 19 applies to Israel.
The guilty Jew is added to the guilty Gentile (whom the Jews know are
guilty), and the whole world is arraigned before God.
OUTLINE
The Diatribe, 3:1-9
The Scriptural Warrant, 3:10-18
The Conclusion, 3:19-20
EXPLANATORY NOTES
Romans 1:183:20
89
lead his imaginary partner to correct answers to real questions that follow from 2:17-29. Five questions and answers are given in the dialogue:
Question: v. 1What, then, is the advantage of being a Jew? Or,
what is the benefit of circumcision?
Response: v. 2Much in every way! First, they were entrusted
with the oracles of God.
Question: v. 3What now: If some were disobedient, does their
unfaithfulness nullify the faithfulness of God?
Response: v. 4Absolutely not! Let God be true and every person a liar, as it is written, so that you may be justified
in your words, and prevail in your judging.
Question: v. 5But if our unrighteousness serves to show Gods
justice (i.e., our unrighteousness gives God an opportunity to be merciful), what shall we say? That God is
unrighteous to inflict wrath? I speak like a human.
Response: v. 6Absolutely not! How in that case could God
judge the world?
Question: vv. 7-8bIf Gods truth abounds all the more to his
glory because of my falsehood, why am I still condemned as a sinner? And why are we blasphemed, and
some accuse us of saying, let us do evil in order that
good may come?
Response: v. 8cThe condemnation of such is just!
Question: v. 9aWhat, then, do we plead as a defense?
Response: v. 9bNothing at all. For we already know that Jew
and also Gentile are all under the power of sin.
The questions of v. 1 confirm the linkage of Jewish identity and circumcision. They give voice to the Jewish and Jewish-Christian conclusion, if Pauls argument is correct, that Israels sin has nullified
Gods covenant with Israel. God has broken faith, and, therefore, cannot be righteous.
Paul responds that there is great advantage in being Jewish. The
Jews have been entrusted with the words of God, the Scriptures. To
be entrusted means to be in covenant; entrustment commits God to
Israel, and places Israel under obligation to faithfulness. No one else
in the world enjoys such an advantage. But note, the advantage is
entirely the initiative of God, not the goodness of the Jewish people.
The second question, v. 3, makes explicit the real issue, the faithfulness of God. Does Jewish unfaithfulness nullify Gods faithfulness?
90
Romans 1:183:20
God
the faithfulness of God
the God of truth
the righteousness of God
the truth of God
Romans 1:183:20
91
affirm. The Jew is caught. God must judge Israel for covenant unfaithfulness if God is to judge the world. The one side of Gods righteousness, grace toward Israel, does not negate the other side, the right to
judge sin. If God demonstrates cheap grace to Israel then Gods role
as righteous judge of the whole world is compromised and ineffective.
The fourth set of questions, the second to follow from the Psalms
citations, concerns the ethical consequences of Gods truthfulness in
relation to human falsehood, vv. 7-8b. Paul poses the problem in the
first person, a form of reducing the issue to its most personal and
absurd level (reductio ad absurdum). Why am I judged a sinner, if my
untruthfulness serves Gods glory by showing God to be righteous?
Could we as Jews not help God out by really sinning? Paul explicitly
mentions that some people blasphemously claim that this in fact is his
teaching, e.g., sin that Gods grace may abound.
Paul dismisses the charge out of hand, Gods judgment of such
people is well deserved. The argument is morally absurd. All people,
including the Jews, are fully responsible to God for what they do.
The final question, v. 9a, sums up the previous issues in a modified form, what, then, do we plead as a defense? If the conclusion
of vv. 1-8 is that Israels sin means God can be righteous as the eschatological judge, does that mean the Jew is really no better off than the
Gentile at the judgment? What defense does the Jew make before
God?
The answer is nothing at all. There is no defense against unfaithfulness. Furthermore, Paul asserts, we already know something, a reference to the argument from 1:182:29. Paul makes explicit what he
has hinted at in the argument. What we know is that Jews and
Gentiles are all under the power of Sin. Paul repeats the catch
phrase, Jew and also Gentile, but this time omits the word first thus
emphasizing the exact equality.
Paul introduces the noun Sin (hamartia) for the first time in
Romans. Sin, singular, in Paul is a power; sins, plural, refer to deeds.
Sin is personified (throughout this commentary, put in bold to highlight Pauls unique understanding of it). It is a power, a magnetic field
that draws all created reality into its force field [Essay: Sin in
Romans]. In Romans, Sin forms a significant statement about Pauls
view of the world (cosmology). Sin as power dominates all people.
Jews and Gentiles are equally under the power of Sin. Both are
enslaved within its magnetic field. The Jews, of course, knew that
about the Gentiles. But Pauls argument now includes them within
Sins reign.
The diatribe does not represent a digression in Romans, but a con-
92
Romans 1:183:20
Romans 1:183:20
93
94
Romans 1:183:20
contrary to typical Jewish thinking, the law does not protect against
the power of Sin, but rather raises consciousness of Sin. The law was
not intended to provide a sense of divine distinctiveness and security,
but rather to make the Jewish people profoundly aware of their
dependence on the grace of God.
Romans 1:183:20
95
96
Romans 1:183:20
faithfulness (Hab. 2:4), and praise God for great is your faithfulness
(Lam. 3:23). The language means firmness, reliability. God is
steady, constant, and reliable. Paul affirms Gods faithfulness at this
point in Romans to stress the continuity of purpose in the covenant
with the Jewish people.
The faithfulness of God becomes a formula in Paul (pistos ho
theos). God is the faithful one who calls people into the family of God
through Christ (1 Cor. 1:9; 1 Thess. 5:25), who enables and strengthens Christians in times of testing (1 Cor. 10:13; 2 Thess. 3:3), who
says yes to humanity in the gospel of Jesus Christ (2 Cor. 1:18).
The first reference to faith after the theme statement in 1:16-17
is a word about God. The righteousness of God is revealed out of
faith, and the faith is Gods not Israels or the Gentiles. God, Paul
asserts, is the reliable one who does not change course or break
covenant because human beings are fickle or fail in covenant.
Paul makes the same point in different language when he states
that God is true (ho theos alths). The Hebrew word for truth is
emunah, usually translated into Greek as faith (pistis). But it is
translated as truth (altheia) consistently in the Psalms to denote
Gods covenant faithfulness to Israel (cf. Pss. 33:4; 89:1, 2, 5, 8, 14,
24, 33, 49; 98:3).
The faithfulness and truthfulness of God help explain the meaning
of the righteousness of God, another term with deep scriptural roots.
The faithful and truthful God is righteous, and the righteous God is
faithful and true [see explanation of 1:17, and Essays: Righteousness
and The Righteousness of God]. Paul is at pains to emphasize that
God is faithful, true, and righteous in relation to Israel, even a faithless
and undeserving Israel. Such a God is foundational for the gospel Paul
preaches, a gospel of universal salvation for all people.
Romans 1:183:20
97
the mercy of God. The writers assume Gods point of view rather than
Israels, and picture a people characterized by idolatry, injustice,
duplicity, and failure. There are no heroes in the Hebrew Bible, no
moral paragons, only failures; Moses, David, and Solomon, as examples, come under the judgment of God.
The language used in this self-criticism is harshsinful nation, offspring of evildoers, rebellious people, sons of the sorceress, harlot, stiff necked, lying sons, offspring of the adulterer and the harlot, children of transgression, and uncircumcised in heart (see Isa.
1:21; 30:9-11; 57:3-5; Jer. 3:6; 7:25-26; 9:26; 11:7-8; Hos. 1:2).
Isaiah and Jeremiah implore God not to forgive Israel (Isa. 2:9; Jer.
18:23). Jeremiah asks God to deliver Israel to famine, even to give them
over to the power of the sword . . . May their men meet death by
pestilence, their youths be slain by the sword in battle (RSV, 18:21).
The same language is found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Fellow
Israelites are called hypocrites, prophets of falsehood, seers of
deceit, preacher of lies, men of the Pit, wicked priest, perverse men who devise plans of Satan against Gods true teacher
(see 1QH 4:6-8, 9-11, 13-14; 1QS 5:10-13; 9:16-18; 1QpHab 8:8;
9:9; 10:9; 11:4; 12:2). Again, there are prayers that enemies not be
forgiven (1QS 2:4-9, 21-22). Similarly, Josephus uses harsh language
that far outstrips anything found in the New Testament (Evans,
1993:8).
What must be understood is that this is the language of an
intrafamily debate. It is language intended to undermine the selfunderstanding of the majority of the people, a theology that sees
Israels election as a source of security. This prophetic language is
delivered by individuals deeply embedded in and part of the Israelite
community, for the purpose of shocking the people out of a deeply
flawed theology of blessed assurance. It is the language of profound
love and suffering for fellow-members of the family; it is not language
directed toward outsiders and enemies.
TEXT IN THE LIFE OF THE CHURCH
98
Romans 1:183:20
Romans 3:21-26
100
Romans 3:21-26
that the cross enables God to justify sinners on the basis of faith without compromising divine righteousness. The text highlights what
humans get, the status of righteousness or justification before God, on
the basis of human faith.
An alternative interpretation sees the thrust of the text as the revelation of Gods end-time righteousness, which is effected through the
faithfulness of Messiah Jesus. The faith theme is two-sided, the faithfulness of Jesus and the faith response of believers. The without distinction theme equalizes Jews and Gentiles (rememberall is
polemical language in Romans). There is no distinction between classes of people. Gods saving actionredemption and propitiation
through Jesus faithfulness has a double effect. It demonstrates the
righteousness of God, and it forms the basis for the redemption of all
people. The point of the text is to prove the righteousness of God
through the faithfulness of Jesus. It highlights the character of God as
the Righteous One who redeems humanity and the world through the
faithfulness of Messiah Jesus. The importance of Gods righteousness
for human salvation is assumed, but it is not the centerpiece of the
argument.
The alternative interpretation is the preferred reading. The issue of
Gods integrity and righteousness now comes onto center stage in
Romans. Pauls concern has less to do with the salvation of humans
than with the righteousness of the saving God. Piling up three purpose clauses, all focused on the demonstration of the righteousness of
God, shows just how central the vindication of God is in Romans and
how important this issue must have been in the Roman churches.
The critical issue facing those churches was, how can God be trustedis God righteous? If all humans are really under the power of
Sin, is this not evidence that God is unrighteous and cannot be trusted? If Gentiles can be incorporated into Gods people without the central symbols of Jewish faith-keeping the lawis God not compromising divine righteousness and justice? Is God not abandoning special promises made to Israel?
The text is one long, complex sentence that is very carefully and
tightly organized. It is centered in a double announcement that the
righteousness of God has been revealed (vv. 21, 22a). The means of
the revelation is explained in three through (dia) clauses (vv. 22b,
24b, 25a). The discussion of the means is interrupted by a parenthesis
that represents a postponed conclusion from the previous argument
(22c-24a). The unit concludes with three purpose clauses that all focus
on the righteousness of God (25b-26). The text is framed by Gods
righteousness, its revelation (21-22b) and demonstration (25b-26).
Romans 3:21-26
101
102
Romans 3:21-26
righteousness without this hallmark of Jewish identity. The new revelation, however, is not an abandonment of the old, but is in continuity with Gods previous actions and words with Israel.
Pauls second thesis begins with a revolutionary notion. The focal
point of Gods end-time, world-transforming salvation has shifted away
from the Torah. Paul will announce the new center in a moment. But
first, he must qualify the idea of a new action of God independent of
the identity marker of Judaism. The Scriptures do testify to Gods new
saving righteousness. Paul again anchors the new in the old, as in 1:2
and in his repeated use of Scripture to support his argument.
The new reality is that the righteousness of God has been and
continues to be revealed. The double announcement of the righteousness of God makes the focus clear. Paul is talking about the endtime saving and right-making power of God to transform the universe
[Essay: Righteousness of God]. This end-time power is being
revealed (phaneroun is a synonym for apokalyptein in 1:17). The
verb form (perfect tense) means the revelation is continuous; it has
taken place and continues to take place.
Pauls announcement is dramatic and transformative. He has just
argued that Jews and Gentiles stand equally before the righteous judgment of God because both are trapped in the magnetic power and structures of Sin. But now, a radically new reality exists. Gods sovereign and
triumphant faithfulness to the covenant and creation is being revealed.
Romans 3:21-26
103
104
Romans 3:21-26
Romans 3:21-26
105
through the faithfulness by means of his blood. The phrase has troubled scholars and translators. The NT, and certainly Paul, does not
speak of faith in the blood of Jesus. Therefore, most scholars do one
of two things: 1) eliminate the words by faith as a late addition to the
text, and read expiation in his blood; or 2) put the words by faith
at the end of the phrase instead of at the beginning as in the Greek,
and translate by his blood, to be received by faith (e.g., the NRSV
puts it: by his blood, effective through faith). There is no textual evidence to delete by faith or to place it after in his blood. Although
it is less convenient for translators, the phrase should be interpreted as
found in the text, through faithfulness by means of his blood. The
faith described is Jesus, not humanitys. Jesus demonstrated his faithfulness by giving his life as a sacrificial offering for Sin. The anchor for
Gods liberation from Sin is the faithfulness of Jesus, not faith in Jesus.
Faith in Jesus is indeed necessary for people to appropriate the
redemption in Christe.g., to all the ones believing in v. 22 (cf. Rom.
10:9-10)but that is not the main point Paul is making here.
106
Romans 3:21-26
Romans 3:21-26
107
1:17. The faith of believers is mentioned once (v. 22b); such faith is
important, but is not the critical point of this text. There are three subjects of faith, Christs (the faith of Jesus), the believers (to all the ones
believing), and Gods (the revelation of Gods saving righteousness).
Jesus is the focal point where the divine and human meet. His faithfulness is the supreme expression of faith in God and the embodiment
of Gods covenant and saving faithfulness to the world. Believers
faithmimic the faithfulnessthe faithfulness of Jesus as Gods act
of salvation, just as Jesus faithed God. To focus on the faith of
believers would hardly be new or startling; such faith is central to
Jewish theology and practice. It certainly would not be grounds for the
revelation of the end-time, world-transforming righteousness of God
in the world. More importantly, it certainly would not be the basis for
eliminating the distinction between Jews and Gentiles, which faith in
1:5, 1:16, and this text does.
Third, Paul articulates a theology of the cross in relation to Jesus.
Jesus death makes people right (justified), atones for sins, especially
the sins of the Gentiles, and redeems people out of enslavement to Sin.
God has acted in Jesus to put things right between Godself and the
world enslaved to Sin. Jesus death was a sacrificial offering; it was a
hilastrion, a word that recalls both the Day of Atonement and the
death of Jewish martyrs. Jesus death liberates (ransoms) from enslavement. The death of Jesus is effective; it forgives previously committed
sins and frees from enslavement. This death is to be received by faith
without recourse to the cult. But it is much more important yet than liberating people from the power of Sin, which Paul will reaffirm in 8:3.
It is the means of revealing the righteousness of God in the world. Jesus
death (and resurrection) introduce a new state of affairs in the world, a
new age, a new creation. Paul will elaborate this later in chapters 5-8.
What is clear is that Paul interprets the death of Jesus in Jewish apocalyptic terms; it defeats the power of Sin and signals a shift of the ages.
Fourth, the language of the text is uniquely Jewishrighteousness
of God, glory of God, faith, redemption, sacrificial offering, by means
of blood, make righteous. The language is covenantal. Paul is
announcing the renewal of the covenant, in which God offers humanity a new exodus in order to maintain and uphold the covenant relationship established with Abraham. Gods righteousness means action
appropriate to the covenant, the salvation of all the children of
Abraham, both Jews and Gentiles.
God is doing something radically new through the faithfulness of
Messiah Jesusrevealing divine righteousness and redemption for all
humans equally. God is renewing the covenant for Jews and Gentiles
108
Romans 3:21-26
alike and equally. This refocusing of the text should not overlook the
important subtheme of human faith and redemption. God is doing a
new thing for all the ones believing in order to make righteous
human beings so that they may once again see the glory of God.
TEXT IN BIBLICAL CONTEXT
One phrase makes a major difference in the interpretation of this text,
through the faith of Messiah Jesus or through the faith in Messiah
Jesus (dia pistes Iesou Christou, v. 22), and the one out of the
faith of Jesus or the one out of faith in Jesus (ton ek pistes Iesou,
v. 26). Grammatically, the phrase can be translated either as the faith
of . . . or the faith in . . . The issue is the meaning of the genitive
construction (the case denoting possession). Is it a subjective genitive
(of, speaking about the subject of the action) or an objective genitive (in, speaking about the object of the action)?
Romans 3:21-26
109
110
Romans 3:21-26
Romans 3:21-26
111
112
Romans 3:21-26
Romans 3:21-26
113
One is corporateit is for all humanity, Jews and Gentiles; the other
is individualisticit is my response to what is prior to and greater
than my faith. The circumference of the circle is dependent on the
center, but the center is not dependent on the circumference; the faith
of Christ continues to manifest the righteousness of God in the world
and to redeem human beings even if I choose not to respond in faith.
Romans 3:21-26 is about gift, the gift of Gods end-time, worldtransforming righteousness to all humanity. It is not primarily about
reception; only one phrase concerns reception, to all the ones believing. God in Christ is graciously, freely, making righteous all people
apart from any ethnic identity and its symbols of peoplehood.
David Ingles wrote a song in 1976 entitled The Faith of Jesus.
The lyrics read:
I live by the faith of the Son of God, justified by the faith of Jesus. Looking
from above with his eyes full of love is the way our Father sees us. But he
only takes the view of me and you through the righteousness of Jesus,
redeemed by the faith of the son of God, justified by the faith of Jesus.
Romans 3:274:25
Romans 3:274:25
115
OUTLINE
The Dialogue, 3:274:2
Question What then becomes of boasting? 3:27a
Paul
It is excluded. 3:27b
Question By what sort of law? Of works? 3:27c
Paul
No, but through the law of faithfulness. For we consider that a person is made righteous by faith apart from
works of law. Or, is God the God of the Jews only? Is
he not the God of the Gentiles also? 3:27d-29b
Question Yes, of the Gentiles also. 3:29c
Paul
Indeed God is one who makes righteous the circumcised
out of faithfulness, and also the circumcised through
faithfulness. 3:30
Question Do we make the law inoperative through the faithfulness? 3:31a
Paul
Absolutely not! But, on the contrary, we establish the
law. 3:31b-c
Question What then shall we say? Have we found Abraham to be
our ancestor (forefather) according to the flesh? For if
Abraham was justified by works, he has something to
boast about. 4:1-2b
Paul
But not before God. 4:2c (JET)
(The question and answer translation of the dialogue is my attempt to
show the dynamics of the conversation. It should not be read as a literal
dialogue between Paul and his dialogue partner.)
116
Romans 3:274:25
EXPLANATORY NOTES
Romans 3:274:25
117
mon with other Jesus followers (we reckon that), is that a person is
made righteous by faith, not by works of the law. The law of faith says
that faith, not markers of Jewish identity, is the basis on which God
makes people righteous. Paul is making a pun on law. The Jews have
been thinking of Gods revelation only in terms of the law, but God
has now revealed divine righteousness apart from the law (v. 21a).
The only law in the new situation of Gods revelation through Messiah
Jesus is the law of faith
The second explanation of the law of faith is the Jewish doctrine
of monotheism, which holds that one God is the God of all peoples.
One God, the Creator of the universe, does not have two faces toward
the different peoples (remember the earlier argument for the impartiality of God, 2:11). Jews and Christians hold this conviction in common. In fact, the Jews in the Diaspora used the One God doctrine to
defend incorporating Gentile proselytes into Judaism. Paul radicalizes
this conviction by arguing that the one God makes righteous circumcised and uncircumcised people on the same basis, by faith. Gentiles
do not have to become Jews to become part of the Messiahs people.
Jewish boasting is ended, because the one God of all people has
revealed divine righteousness in Jesus. The question of peoples relationship to God is moved to a different ground. It is now based on the
free revelation of Gods righteousness through the faithfulness of
Jesus and the human response of faith.
But, another question is raised if Gentiles do not have to become
Jews to be made righteous. Is the law not destroyed by the teaching
of righteousness through the faithfulness (lit.)? The issue is the status of the law as the symbol of Gods election of Israel. Is not the law,
and thus Israels covenant with God, wiped out by Pauls teaching?
Paul decisively rejects the conclusion, absolutely not (v. 31)! Instead,
the opposite is true. Paul claims that his teaching establishes the law,
literally lifts it up. Paul makes a provocative claim. He will elaborate
in the interpretation of the story of Abraham.
For some Jewish Christians this discussion is getting out of hand.
There is historical proof for being made righteous by works of law and
for boasting. The evidence is Abraham, the father of the Jewish
nation. Therefore, the questions in 4:1, what then shall we say?
Have we found Abraham our forefather according to the flesh?
This translation reads very differently than most English translations,
e.g., NRSV (what then are we to say was gained by Abraham . . .),
or NIV (What then shall we say that Abraham . . . discovered in this
matter?). What these translations have in common is the translation
of v. 1 as one sentence, and the omission of a very important phrase,
118
Romans 3:274:25
Romans 3:274:25
119
the One God is creating in the world on the basis of faith, and this
inclusion of the Gentiles is fulfilling Gods covenant with Israel.
It is important to note two things about the dialogue. First, the language again is honor-shame language. Paul rejects a particular claim
to honor that shames one people by giving special status and worth
to another people. The universality of Godone God who makes
righteous all people on the same basishas radical social consequences. It includes all people of faith without distinction.
Second, the dialogue sets up the agenda for the biblical exposition
to follow. Two questions are raised and answered very briefly at the
end of the dialogue, the relationship of faith to the law (3:31) and the
meaning of Abraham (4:1-2). Paul addresses these questions in
reverse order in 4:3ff., first the meaning of Abraham (4:2-8) and then
the relationship of faith and law (4:9-17).
120
Romans 3:274:25
Romans 3:274:25
121
122
Romans 3:274:25
Romans 3:274:25
123
to the one out of the faith of Abraham who is the father of us all . . ..
Faith defined as grace is inclusive; it is to all. By grace Abraham
becomes the father of us all (Jews and Gentiles) rather than our
ancestor according to the flesh (Jews only as in v. 1) [Essay: Grace
in Romans].
Everything hinges on Gods gracious initiative. The evidence of Gods
grace is regenerative and creative power (e.g., making alive the dead and
calling into being the not being). God, the Creator of life, continues to
create new life. The children of Abraham are the children of promise by
faith through the grace of the God who makes alive the dead.
Verses 9-21 elaborate the meaning of faith but little is said about
the quality of human faith until v. 17. Abrahams faith is mentioned in
v. 17 via an allusion to Genesis 15:6, he believed God. Verses 1821 explain the nature of Abrahams faith, which is characterized as
trust in God to do the impossible (v. 17), as hoping against hope (v. 18),
as the conviction that God is able to do what is promised
(v. 21). It is defined three times as trusting God to make alive the dead,
to fulfill a promise against earthly realities that make impossible the
fulfillment of that promise. The opposite of faith is be weak in faith
(v. 19), doubt (v. 20), unfaith (v. 20).
Two things are amazing about the reference to Abrahams faith.
The first is that so little is said about it. The emphasis is not on the
quality of Abrahams faith, nor is there any explicit appeal to imitate
it. What the text does say is that Abrahams unconditional trust gave
glory to God (v. 20). By acknowledging his total dependence on God,
Abraham did what the creature in 1:21 refused to do, and what
boasting in works of law sought to deny (3:27). Second, more is said
about God than about Abrahams faith. The character of the God
faithed determines the character of the faith exercised. The point of
the text is that the fulfillment of the promise is based on the power of
God. Even more important than Abrahams faith is Gods faithfulness.
What does faith mean? Faith is defined as much by God as by
Abraham. The promise is based on the righteousness of faith and on
grace. The exposition of Genesis 15:6 closes by focusing on God,
God reckoned him righteous (v. 22). The only appropriate response
to Gods faith and grace is human faith as trust in the faithfulness of
God, even against all the odds. That is what Abraham did, and he
gave glory to God.
124
Romans 3:274:25
Romans 3:274:25
125
uses the Abraham story to explain the Jewish theology of the merits
of the fathers (the works of the fathers are accumulated and meritorious for subsequent generations). But with a difference. The blessing
of Abraham is not only for Jews, but also for the Gentiles. Abraham
is not simply an example of Christian faith prior to Jesus. He is the
father of all the people of God, which is now a worldwide people.
Gods answer to the sin of Adam is the people of Abraham.
This reinterpretation of Abraham becomes even more significant
when the story is read in the context of the whole letter. Not only does
Abrahams gave glory to God (4:20) answer humanitys refusal to glorify God (1:20), but Abraham as an ungodly (aseb) person, whom
God makes righteous (4:5) contrasts with the ungodly (asebeian)
who experience Gods wrath (1:18). The power (dunamis) of God,
which effects salvation (1:16) and is manifested in creation (1:20), is
precisely the power Abraham faiths as capable of fulfilling what God
has promised. The Creator God of 1:20 and 25 is the same God who
calls into existence the nonexistent (4:17b). Abraham is the paradigmatic answer to the human problem.
Abraham also has a direct bearing on the divisions in the Roman
churches. Jewish Christians must welcome Gentile Christians because
both have the same father (15:7). That is a new development. While
Abraham was used in Hellenistic Judaism to legitimize Gentile proselytes, these proselytes were not permitted to call him our father;
when the Jews said our father the Gentile converts had to say your
father. But now in Rome, Paul says, Abraham is our father for
Jews and Gentiles. Gentile Christians cannot write off the Jewish past
as of no account; they share the same past and the same father.
In addition, both peoples are made righteous by God on the same
basis, faith. Abraham is used to address the problems of faith in
Rome. When Paul says Abraham was not weak but strong in faith, he
uses the same language as in the conflict in Rome, weak in faith and
strong in faith. Abraham does not doubt (4:20, 21), while Roman
Christians do (14:23). Abraham is fully convinced (4:21), while
Roman Christians are not (14:5). Abrahams faith resulted in giving
glory to God, which is precisely the outcome of Gentile faith (15:9).
Abraham, the father of all believers, is also the model believer who
shows the Roman Christians what it means to be people of faith. His
faith prefigures the faith of Christians, and also the faith of Christ.
Both Abrahams and Christs faith have saving significance; they
both create a people. Abraham is the biblical precedent for the idea
that the faithfulness of a single individual brings blessing on the many.
Abraham is a type of Jesus. After all, the Abraham story is located
126
Romans 3:274:25
Abraham
Abraham is a popular and important figure in Judaism. He is the
father of the Jews, the model Jew, the one who forsook idolatry as a
youth and placed his trust in the One Creator God and obeyed this
God perfectly even before the giving of the law. To be a child of
Abraham is the source of great pride.
Abraham is also important in the NT; he is mentioned 72 times.
Nineteen of these references occur in Pauls letters, 18 in Romans and
Galatians (the other one is 2 Cor. 11:22). All but four of them (Rom.
9:7; 11:1; 2 Cor. 11:22; Gal. 4:22) are found in Romans 4 and
Galatians 3. The discussion of Abraham in these chapters has a high
concentration of important theological words, e.g., faith, righteousness/make right (17), law (19), promise (12), works (seven), seed (six),
nations/gentiles (four).
The Romans and Galatians discussions of Abraham center in an
exposition of Genesis 15:6. Both letters of Paul appeal to Abraham as
a scriptural demonstration. Each case follows a very important theological statement (Gal. 2:15-21; Rom. 3:21-26). Between this theological assertion and the exposition of the Abraham story there is a
short dialogue paragraph (Gal. 3:1-5; Rom. 3:274:2) that raises practical questions related to the readers. Paul uses Abraham in both letters
to discuss the basis for being in right relationship to God, and in both,
he contrasts works with faith. Both assert that Gentile Christians are
children of Abraham by faith just as Jews are children of Abraham.
There are also important differences between the Romans and
Galatians interpretations of Abraham. There is a much greater focus
on the faith in Romans 4 (vv. 3, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
22). And the faith in Romans is God centered, not Christ centered
as in Galatians. In fact, Christ is not mentioned until the end of the
chapter, and then as the object of Gods resurrection power, not the
faith of Christians. Righteousness is nuanced differently in Galatians
than in Romans. In Galatians it is synonymous with the Gentiles being
blessed in Abraham (3:8) and receiving the Spirit (3:14). In Romans it
concerns making righteous the ungodly (4:6), and is equated with
forgiveness and covering of sins (4:7-8). Galatians pictures Christ as
Abrahams singular seed; Romans 4 portrays all who believe, Jews
and Gentiles, as Abrahams seed. In Galatians 3, the content of the
Romans 3:274:25
127
128
Romans 3:274:25
Romans 3:274:25
129
130
Romans 3:274:25
Paul opens the letter by linking his vocational identity with the gospel
1) of God, 2) the fulfillment of Scripture, and 3) Gods son (1:1-4).
Paul announces at the outset that the central focus of his letter is God.
The opening four chapters begin with God, a God whose redemption is through Jesus Christ, is active in the impartial judgment of all
peoples, and ends with God making righteous all people through the
death and resurrection of Jesus our Lord. The God who is the
source of Pauls gospel is clearly the God of Abraham, of Israel, of the
Scriptures. But this God is also the God of all human beings and of
the creation.
Romans 1-4 argues for the righteousness of God in judgment and
salvation. God, who is impartial, judges all people equally and makes
righteous all people on the same basis. The heart of the argument is
that God has disclosed end-time righteousness in and through Messiah
Jesus. This revelation has created a new reality, salvation and righteousness that deals with Gods wrath, overcomes the power of Sin,
and incorporates Gentiles into the people of God in fulfillment of the
promises of God.
The argument presupposes the election of Israel as Gods people
and the salvation and incorporation of Gentiles into the people of God
Romans 3:274:25
131
through Christ. Paul demonstrates that neither Israels election nor the
salvation of Gentiles in any way compromises Gods righteousness
and integrity. God is impartial to all people. Jews and Gentiles are
equally accountable to God, and are made righteous on the same
basis. What God requires of Jews and Gentiles is unconditional trust,
faith, in the divine power to fulfill the promises to Abraham. Each
major point in the argument is confirmed by an appeal to Scripture,
Habakkuk 2:4 in 1:17, an extended citation of Scriptures in 3:10-18,
the exposition of the Abraham story in 4:3-25.
The argument of 1:164:25 is directed especially at the Jewish
Christians and their Gentile supporters in the Roman churches. It is
designed to effect a change in their thinking and attitudes toward
Gentile Christians. God is righteous in extending end-time righteousness to Gentiles through Messiah Jesus. Gentile Christians are true
children of Abraham because faith, the Messiahs and the believers, is
the determining factor in salvation and in identifying Abrahams true
children. Gods fulfillment of the covenant with Abraham through the
incorporation of Gentiles into Gods people does not invalidate Israels
election but confirms it.
Pauls argument so far centers the views of the Gentile Christians.
He gives them a sense of solidarity with Jewish identity and history.
He shows them that being made righteous and strong faith are
found first in Abraham. Paul thus reminds both Jews and Gentiles that
the gospel is to the Jew first and also to the Gentile. Trusting
Gentiles are one with trusting Jews in Abraham, because of the new
revelation of the righteousness of God through Messiah Jesus. But
Paul also lays the foundation for his subsequent exhortation to the
Gentile Christians in chs. 9-11. Ethnic Israel will not be excluded from
Gods salvation, because as regards election they are beloved for the
sake of their ancestors (11:28).
Romans 5:18:39
Faith
Righteousness
Life
Death
Sin
Chs. 1-4
31
30
2
0
4
Chs. 5-8
3
23
24
43
41
132
Chs. 9-11
14
11
3
0
1
Romans 5:18:39
133
Chapters 14 spoke much about Jews and Gentiles. In chs. 58, there
is no such talk, though Paul returns to this theme in chs. 911. The
righteousness of God is not mentioned in chs. 58. The OT is cited
21 times in chs. 14, 32 times in chs. 911, but only twice briefly in
chs. 58 (7:7; 8:36). Exegetical arguments like those in chs. 34 drop
out until chs. 911. In addition to the heavy use of life death, and sin
language, Paul introduces other new termse.g., enmity, reconciliation, slavery, freedom, adoption, peace, Gods love, and Holy
Spirit. A final stylistic difference is that each chapter closes with an
our Lord formula, through Jesus Christ our Lord, or in Jesus Christ
our Lord (5:21; 6:23; 7:25; 8:39).
But, there also is continuity. Law continues as a subtheme in the
letter, mentioned in 5:20-21 and receiving detailed discussion in 7:125. The references to boasting in 5:2-3, 11 indicate that Paul is continuing the argument from chs. 24. Salvation is reintroduced for
the first time since 1:16. Chapters 58 discuss the meaning of Christs
death (3:22-26) from several different perspectives. The death of
Christ for our trespasses and his resurrection for our being made
righteous (4:25) changes reality; it means a new understanding and
reordering of life.
While explicit Jew-Gentile language is absent in chs. 58, the
agenda remains implicit. The continued discussion of Jewish issues
(e.g., the law), makes this clear. Equally important is Pauls significant
exposition of the universal relevance of Messiah Jesus and the Holy
Spirit in chs. 5, 6, 8, and the use of cherished Jewish language to
describe the new people God is creating in the world.
Chapters 58 are defined clearly as a text unit by a double inclusio. The first is the beginning and ending of the text unit with the
christological formula our Lord Jesus Christ (5:1; 8:39). The second
is the chiastic structure of chs. 58:
A Peace with God, 5:1-11
B Victory over Sin via Christ, 5:12-21
C Death of the Old Humanity, 6:17:6
B Victory over the Flesh via the Spirit, 7:78:11
A Sonship with God, 8:12-39
The chiastic structure suggests a specially close parallel between 5:111 and 8:12-39. Both sections indicate that the consequences of
being made righteous are peace with God and hope. Both stress the
theological and christological basis for this peace and hope; it is the
result of the love of God expressed in the gift of Messiah Jesus poured
134
Romans 5:18:39
into our hearts through the Holy Spirit. Hope in both sections confronts and overcomes suffering because the love of God will not let
us go (5:3-4, 6, 8, 9, 10; 8:17-18, 32, 35-39).
Chapter 5:1-11 introduces the themes that are developed more
fully in ch. 8, especially 8:12-39. Chapter 5:12-21 outlines the christological victory over Adam that is the basis for the peace with God of
5:1-11 and 8:12-39. Chapters 68:11 answer questions which can
be raised concerning Sin (6:17:6) and the law (7:78:11). These
questions were hinted at earlier (3:8; 3:31; 4:13-15), but were not
answered.
PREVIEW
Chapter 5:1-11 is a clearly defined text unit. Chapter 4:24-25 serves
as a solemn conclusion to the discussion of 3:274:22. Chapter 5:111 is distinct from what follows in 5:12f. The first person style of
4:24-25 is continued in 5:1-11, while 5:12-21 shifts to the third person. The subject matter also is different from what precedes and what
follows. The first and last verses of 5:1-11 form an inclusio, both concern peace/reconciliation with God, both contain the formula,
through our Lord Jesus Christ.
Ch. 5:1-11 is also a transitional passage. Chapter 4:23-25 asserts
that Abraham was for our sake also, the our being defined as the
ones faithing the resurrection of Jesus our Lord out of the dead.
Chapter 5:1-11 begins to explain what the death and resurrection of
Christ means for the ones faithing.
The text unit enumerates the benefits or blessings that flow from
the revelation of the righteousness of God through the faithfulness of
Christ to those being faithful. The use of point-in-time action, past
tense verbs, having been made righteous (justified, in vv. 1 and 9),
indicates that the action mentioned is prior to the action of the verbs
that follow. The fact of being made righteous is the basis for conclusions that can be drawn. Each statement of the basis is followed by
a listing of benefits, peace and boasting, salvation and boasting. Paul
exhorts acceptance of the benefits in the first list, and narrates the
benefits as fact in the second list.
Romans 5:18:39
135
Two forms of reasoning are used in 5:1-11. First, the not only,
but also argument is used in vv. 3a and 11a. Paul thus exceeds the
statements made in vv. 1-2 and vv. 9-11 respectively. Secondly, the
minor to major argument, much more, is used in vv. 9a and 10c.
What applies in a lesser case will certainly apply in a greater one.
At the heart of the conclusions is the fact that there now exists a
state of peace or reconciliation with God. The cause of the hostility
has been removed at Gods initiative. Therefore, boasting, which was
excluded earlier, is now acceptable.
OUTLINE
The Basis, 5:1a
Therefore, having been made righteous out of faithfulness
The Exhortations, 5:1b-8
5:1b-2b Peace with God
5:2c-4a Boasting in hope
5:4b-8 Gods Love Poured Out
The Basis, 5:9a
Therefore, much more having been made righteous now
by means of his blood
The Benefits, 5:9b-11
5:9b-10 Salvation from wrath
5:11 Boasting in God
EXPLANATORY NOTES
136
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
137
138
Romans 5:18:39
the likeness and radiance of God, from which humanity was cut off by
Sin. The ultimate eschatological hope for the Jews was the restoration
of this likeness of God. In Christ the believer has the hope of seeing
the end-time glory restored. In fact, in 8:30 Paul says glory is already
a fact for the followers of Jesus. The notion of boasting in future glory
affirms Pauls understanding of present end-time existence. The
Christian life is not defined solely in terms of the past. The future has
broken into the present and is the basis of Christian boasting.
The not only, but also phrase in v. 3 signals that Paul is going to
extend and intensify the boasting claim of v. 2. He contradicts the natural tendency to be ashamed of and to bemoan tribulations by urging
believers to boast in the midst of them. Tribulation (thlipsis) can
mean any trouble, but it had definite end-time associations in Jewish
apocalyptic literature and early Christian preaching (cf. Mark 13:19).
It means the sufferings, literally birth pangs, of the last days. The
coming of the Messiah and the end-times, it was believed, would be
associated with intense tribulations. The theme of enduring suffering
was a prominent feature of Jewish martyr theology, of which Job was
the model. Its theology was based on the idea of Gods disciplinary
chastisement of Israel (see Deut. 8:2-5; Prov. 3:11-12; Sir. 2:1-5;
4:17-18; 18:13-14; 23:1-3; Wis. 3:1-6; 11:9-10; 2 Macc. 6:12-16;
7:32-33; in the NT, 1 Cor. 11:32; Heb. 12:5-11; Rev. 3:19).
Suffering due to faithfulness was evidence of Israels covenant relationship with God. Why boast in suffering? Because it produces (lit.,
works out) patient endurance which leads to a quality of provenness, which in turn confirms hope.
Romans 5:18:39
139
140
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
141
142
Romans 5:18:39
ship with God, of solidarity with God. This is the foundation for the
subsequent exhortations to solidarity, to welcoming and loving relationships among fellow Christians in Rome (chs. 1216).
The christological emphasis of chs. 58 with its different vocabulary and themes, has always raised questions of its relationship to the
rest of Romans. The older Protestant interpretations read Romans
18 as a progression from justification in chs. 14 to sanctification in
chs. 58. The History of Religions interpretation during the first part
of the twentieth century argued that chs. 15 contained Pauls dialogue with Jews, while in chs. 68 his real position emerged, a position deeply influenced by Hellenistic rather than Jewish thought. Chs.
911 were always the problem in these interpretations, and were
often either ignored or treated as an appendix to the real center of
Pauls thought. More recent interpreters have seen the continuity of
chs. 14 and 911. Given the apparent link between chs. 14 and
911, chs. 58 now become the problem, because they seem discontinuous with these surrounding chapters.
The interpretation outlined here reads chs. 58 as continuous with
chs. 14. Chapter 5:1-11 anticipates the conclusion of 8:31-39. The
Creator God who acted in behalf of Israel while they were sinners has
acted again to deliver all human beings. The reason for both actions
is the love of God, a theme as covenantal as righteousness. The fruits
of being made righteouspeace with God (the great eschatological
hope of the prophets; e.g., Isa. 32, 54, 59; Jer. 8; Ezek. 34, 37);
access to God (the goal of Temple worship); the coming of the Spirit
(the hope of Isa. 11 and 61; and Ezek. 11, 18, 36, 37, 39); boasting
in the hope of the glory of God (which Adam lost and is to be
restored)all articulate the dreams and eschatological hopes of Israel.
Those hopes are now fulfilled, Paul asserts, in Messiah Jesus and in
the people of faithJews and Gentiles.
Paul pictures the current experience of followers of Jesus as the
end-time fulfillment of the promises and prophecies for Israel. Even
the theme of current suffering stands within the story line of Israels
experience and hope. The people of Israel suffer as they await the
final vindication of God. The suffering of the people is transferred to
the Messiah in some branches of Jewish thought. The death of innocent martyrs is believed to turn away the wrath of God (2 Macc. 7;
4 Macc. 17). The only difference in Paul is that the people rescued
are not the nation of Israel, but the Jew-Gentile family of Abraham
from 3:214:25. The result is that boasting, which was disallowed to
the nation of Israel, is restored to the children of Abraham who are
made righteous out of faith because this people boasts in the salvation
Romans 5:18:39
143
of God that extends the blessings for Israel to all people. At every
point in the opening argument of chs. 58, what is ascribed to those
made righteous out of faith is what had been defined as the privilege of Israel. Paul is advancing a singular argumentthe revelation
of the righteousness of God to all humanitynot digressing from it.
The text is a bridge in another very important way. It pictures God
as the Patron who freely gives new status and privileges to the client,
humanity. God the Patron is clearly the superior person in the narrative. God is righteous and loving. God is the person of honor.
Humanity, the client, is a weak, ungodly, sinful enemy. Humanity represents the dishonorable, the shameful.
God as the honorable Patron acts against all social convention and
honors the shameful client. God gives the client a new status
righteousness. This gifts the client with enormous privilegespeace
with God, access to God, hope of sharing the glory of God, recipient
of Gods love, reconciliation with God, future salvation from the wrath
due the dishonorable client (1:18f.).
God the Patron gives all of this to humanity, the client, freely and
without obligation, through the death of Christ. Paul elaborates the
meaning of Christs death as gracious gift (3:24) through the
metaphor of the dominant social system of the day, patron-client, and
the dominant social value, honor-shame. The patron, not the client,
takes all the initiative to establish a relationship of honor that overcomes the distance between them and replaces shame with honor.
God the Patron is a model of how patrons, the strong in the church,
should relate to clients, the weak.
Boasting
There is a negative and a positive boasting in Romans. Boasting in
exclusive Jewish identity and salvation is excluded (2:17, 23; 3:27;
4:2). Boasting in God (5:2, 11), in suffering (5:3), and in the fruits of
Christian mission (15:17) are affirmed. What is clear is that the statement in 3:27boasting is excludedis not Pauls central thesis about
boasting. Boasting in Romans is not fundamentally about human pride
and arrogance, which is the opposite of faith; it is not reliance upon
oneself rather than upon God, as in so much Protestant interpretation
(see Bultmann, 1951:281, for a classic Protestant interpretation).
Paul does not prohibit boasting itself. He rejects only boasting of spe-
144
Romans 5:18:39
cial status as a Jew. Boasting that affirms God and the work of God
is encouraged.
Pauls interpretation of boasting in Romans is consistent with his
use in other letters. Boasting in the Lord is exhorted twice with the
citation of Jeremiah 9:22 (1 Cor. 1:31; 2 Cor. 10:17). Boasting in
Christ is affirmed (1 Cor. 15:31; Gal. 6:14; Phil. 1:26; 3:3). Boasting
in weakness is appropriate (2 Cor. 11:30; 12:5, 9). The most characteristic form of boasting in Paul is in the fruits of his mission (e.g.,
2 Cor. 7:4, 14; 8:24; 9:2, 3; 10:8; 11:10, 12; 1 Thess. 2:19). Paul
boasts in the results of his missionary work both to encourage the
churches he has established and to oppose other missionary efforts
that seek to undermine his work. He consistently rejects two kinds of
boasting, boasting in exclusive Jewish identity (Gal. 6:13; Eph. 2:9),
and boasting in the flesh (e.g., 1 Cor. 1:29; 3:21; 5:6; 13:3; 2 Cor.
11:18; Phil. 3:3). The boasting in the flesh comes closest to the
dominant interpretation of boasting in Paul; it involves the rejection of
God and the work of God. But it is important to note that it is only
one boasting theme in Paul, and that it serves a very specific function.
The rejection of boasting in the flesh is certainly not Pauls dominant boasting theme, and is not present at all in Romans. Paul has
more positive things to say about right boasting than negative things
to say about wrong boasting.
Reconciliation
Boasting in God is specifically linked in Romans to reconciliation with
God (5:11). Reconciliation language is used 13 times in Pauls writings
(the verb katallass occurs six timesRom. 5:10 [twice]; 1 Cor. 7:11;
2 Cor. 5:18, 19, 20; the noun katallag is used four timesRom.
5:11; 11:15; 2 Cor. 5:18, 19; the verb apokatallass occurs three
timesEph. 2:16; Col. 1:20, 22). The two critical texts are Romans
5:10-11 and 2 Corinthians 5:18-21. In the first, we have seen, reconciliation is an act of God prior to and independent of any human
responsehumans were reconciled to God while enemies (10a), they
have been reconciled (10b), they have received reconciliation (11c).
God initiates reconciliation; humans receive it. 2 Corinthians 5 makes
the same point. God reconciles us and the world through Jesus
Christ. Therefore, followers of Jesus exhort people be reconciled to
God. The effect of Gods initiative is to make Christians the righteousness of God. The Colossians 1:15-20 hymn asserts that God
reconciles to himself all things . . . making peace by the blood of
the cross. And in Ephesians 2 God reconciles Jews and Gentiles to
each other and to God through Christ.
Romans 5:18:39
145
146
Romans 5:18:39
Therefore, we hope for the glory of God (v. 2). The past work of
God in Christ and the present experience of Gods grace leads to the
future. Hope of completed salvation arises from the experience of
future salvation now already in present experience. Salvation is ultimately future, eschatological, and cosmic (as ch. 8 makes clear).
Faithfulness is no guarantee against suffering between the times.
Therefore, Paul exhorts the reframing of suffering, especially suffering
for faithfulness. Christians are to boast in suffering, thus declaring
their dependence on God and confessing that testing reinforces hope.
Suffering between the times does not contradict the experience of
Gods grace, but complements it by strengthening the character of
grace and faith.
Romans 5:18:39
147
148
Romans 5:18:39
Christs body), that God is for us and that nothing, nothing will be
able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Jesus on the cross re-honors people by taking on their shame, by
removing the alienation that separates them from God and others,
and thereby reincorporating them into Gods people.
The affirmative, sometimes very emotional, response from women
and minority groups, in the writers experience, to the distinction
between sin as guilt and sin as shame, and the teaching of different
forms of salvation for different experiences of sin, suggests that
church must become much more sensitive to the diversity of peoples
experience of sin, and to the need for different experiences of salvation, different understandings and experiences of the grace of God
through Jesus Christ to transform broken and sinful men and women.
Guilt/Forgiveness
Shame/Honor
Focus
act/deed
self in relation
Nature
disobedience
broke a law
made a mistake
State
violator
unclean, dirty
Subjective
remorse
self accusation
fear of punishment
anger
depression
hostility
shamedisgraceexposed
self-depreciation
fear of abandonment
rage
embarrassment
alienation
Objective
accused
charged
condemnsentence
disapproval
ridiculedhold in contempt
excludeseparate
relations brokengo to a
new place to build a new
identity
Remedy
expiationforgiveness reconciliation
pardon
re-honorrestore face
restitution
reacceptance,
reincorporation
(The chart is based on materials in Kraus, 1987; Green and Baker, 2000.)
Romans 5:18:39
149
150
Romans 5:18:39
PREVIEW
Verses 12-21 of chapter 5 shift from the first person to the third, signaling a change of subject from what precedes and what follows. The
text is an extended comparison between Christ and Adam. Both are
viewed as representative figures whose actions affect all humanity.
The comparison makes one basic point: Christ is greater than Adam,
and, therefore, the result of his liferighteousness and lifeis greater
than the result of Adamssin and death. The fundamental comparison is straightforward:
Adam
Christ
Sin
Righteousness
Death
Life
But this single point is made in a complex way, as Paul explains the
basic comparison repeatedly with different words. The arguments of
the comparative statements are not always easy to follow. The resulting complexity is the source of both great theological richness and
debate.
The focus of interpretation since Augustine has been Adam, especially the sin of Adam. But that is not the focus of Paul. His central
concern is christology. This text is the second most important presentation of Christ so far in Romans; the first was 3:21-26. Adam is
introduced as a foil for Christ, to draw attention to the cosmic significance of Christ and the salvation he effects. The purpose is to ground
the hope Paul expressed in 5:1-11peace with God, salvation from
Gods wrath, reconciliation with Godin christology.
The comparison/contrast nature of the argument is clear from the
language Paul uses. He continues the much-more method of comparison from vv. 1-11 (see vv. 15 and 17). To that he adds just as . . .
so also, and not as . . . so also comparisons. The comparisons look
like this:
just as . . . so also
v. 12
Romans 5:18:39
not as . . . so also
for if . . . how much more
not as . . . (so also)
for if . . . how much more
(just) as . . . so also
just as . . . so also
just as . . . so also
151
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
15
15
16
17
18
19
21
vv. 15, 19
v. 15
v. 15
v. 16
v. 16
v. 18
v. 19
vv. 19-20
The central themes Paul wishes to address through these contrasts are
indicated by the repeated use of key terms: one man (12 times),
grace/free gift (seven times), human being (six times), sin (six times),
trespass (six times), righteous (dik) words (six times), reign (five times),
many (five times), all (four times), abound (three times).
OUTLINE
The Origin of DEATH, 5:12-14
5:12
Thesis
5:13-14 Supporting Argument
The Comparison of Adam and Christ, 5:15-21
5:15-17 Contrast: Trespass and Gift
5:18-21 Four Comparisons
Trespass and Condemnation with Righteous Act and
Righteousness
Disobedience with Obedience
Sin with Grace
Death with Life
152
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
153
is believed, will invade the world very soon, overthrow these evil powers, and establish divine rule and righteousness in the world.
The forensic mode of apocalyptic thought paints a quite different
picture. Evil is due to human responsibility, not cosmic evil powers.
Human beings are free persons, and they make wrong choices, they
reject God; they are responsible for sin. God has provided the law as
a remedy for this situation. The law is Gods great gift to help people
overcome sin; it gives people a second chance. God will hold people
accountable in the Last Judgment for their obedience or disobedience
to the law. God will give eternal life to those who live in obedience to
the law, eternal death to those who disobey the law. The origin of sin
in this scenario is the result of a human fall, the disobedience of Adam
and Eve.
In some literature, the two forms of thought are married. In the
Qumran community, which produced the Dead Sea Scrolls, for example, the two theologies are merged. There the law functions also as
Gods powerful weapon against the cosmic evil powers. Through the
law God enables the righteous community to resist and overcome
the power of demonic forces. As one scholar says, in Jewish apocalyptic eschatology, Gods Law provides a ticket, the only ticket, on a
through train from this world to the next (de Boer, 1988:90; also de
Boer, 1989).
Paul interprets the victory of Christ over sin by a very creative theological interaction with the Jewish Adam theology and apocalyptic
eschatology just outlined.
EXPLANATORY NOTES
154
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
155
156
Romans 5:18:39
it also answers v. 12a-b. The in order that is followed by a comparison that begins with just as, exactly as in v. 12. Just as Sin reigned
in Death summarizes v. 12, so also Grace might reign through
righteousness to eternal life responds to v. 12. The rulership of Sin
is answered by the rulership of Grace [Essay: Grace in Romans].
Grace also rules, and it dispossesses the rulership of Sin. The nature
of Sins rule is characterized by one phrase, in death. The more powerful rulership of Grace is characterized by two phrases, through
righteousness and to eternal life. The means of Graces rule is the
end-time and powerful righteousness of God. Gods Grace overcomes Sin because the righteousness of God is being manifested in
the world through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ. The consequence of the rule of Grace is eternal life, the answer to Death.
There is one final comparison that frames the passage. If we look
at v. 12, it begins with through one man. By contrast, v. 21 ends with
through Jesus Christ our Lord. One person, Jesus Christ, answers
one person, Adam.
The frame of the passage looks like this:
through one person
Sin came into the world and through Sin Death
Grace reigns through righteousness to eternal life
through Jesus Christ our Lord.
This frame defines the comparison being made throughout the passage. The categories of the comparison are cosmic apocalyptic. It
involves two people and two powers of universal significance. The
point of the comparison is that the second person, Christ, triumphs
over the first person, Adam, and because of that the rulership of Sin
and Death is replaced by the rulership of Grace and Eternal life.
The frame of the comparison helps interpret the remainder of
v. 12. Verse 12c-d elaborate the meaning of the entry of Sin into the
world in 12a-b. Death is universal because Sin is universal, v. 12c.
Sin is universal in v. 12 for two reasons. First, it entered the world as
power; it controls the world. Second, Paul adds in v. 12d because all
have sinned. This last phrase in v. 12 has been one of the most controversial in the NT; it is the basis for the doctrine called original sin.
There is now general agreement that it means because all have
sinned rather than in whom all have sinned [Essay: Original Sin].
Paul, in agreement with Jewish apocalyptic eschatology, affirms
both corporate destiny-Sin because of one and personal responsibilityall sin. Adam is a representative personality, a paradigm.
Romans 5:18:39
157
Sin
Death
all people
158
Romans 5:18:39
him to transgress, and subjected all people to the rule of Death even
when they did not transgress a law.
Pauls explanation of the relation of Sin and law makes some very
important claims. First, Paul defends the law. Sin is not a function of
the law. Every human being came under the power of Sin before the
giving of the law. The law functions to define the shape of Sin, but
does not cause it. The law reveals what Sin looks like (i.e., the rejection of God). That, of course, means that it is only in the presence of
the law, only in Israel and the church, that Sin is really understood.
Second, v. 14 describes the similarity of Adam and Moses. Both were
under the law. All other people between them were not under the law,
and thus did not transgress the way both of them did. Adam as a
type of the coming one is a reference to Moses rather than to Christ,
as in traditional interpretation. Death reigned between Adam and
Moses, the great models of law, even though all people were not
under the law. Third, Pauls interpretation of the relation of Sin and
law is clearly within the cosmic apocalyptic framework. The problem
in the world is Sin as power. Humanity exists in a corporate solidarity in Sin even apart from personal sin as transgression. The law does
not rescue people from that power, but rather helps define the nature
of Sin.
Romans 5:18:39
159
much more argument from vv. 9 and 10. The one person Jesus
Christ effected the grace of God even [rather than and] the free
gift in grace (JET). The double use of gracethe grace of God and
in graceis amplified by the word free gift to underline the gracious
gift nature of Christs work. The gift in this context is righteousness,
the free gift of righteousness in v. 17, unto righteousness of life in
v. 18, will be made righteous in v. 19, through righteousness in
v. 21. The free gift of righteousness is not only to the many, a reference to those beyond the Jewish people, so as to equal Adams sin,
but abounded for the many. It went far beyond what was needed to
correct the consequences of Adams trespass. The correspondence
between Adam and Christ is that both have consequences for all
humans. The difference is that the grace of God through Christ is
more abundant than the sin of Adam.
The second contrast, vv. 16-17, focuses on the agents who produce the universal effects. The contrast also radicalizes the consequences of each agents action by interpreting it apocalyptically. The
key word is the repeated one person (henos, one man, NRSV). The
sin of one person is set directly against the gift of one person. The
one trespass produced condemnation, eschatological judgment. The
gift is greater than the one persons sin and its consequences
because it responds to many sins and results in righteousness. The
contrast looks like this:
one sin
many sins
judgment
divine gift
condemnation
righteousness.
Christ did not simply begin where Adam began. He began where
Adam left off by taking on the whole trail of sin that Adam initiated,
the many sins of all Adams descendants.
The contrast is interpreted apocalyptically in v. 17. The one trespass, which in v. 15 resulted in the death of the many, here results in
the reign of Death. One persons trespass introduces the rule of
Death, total end-time separation from God. Again, Paul uses the
much more argument to provide the counterpoint. The ones who
receive the abundance of grace even the gift of righteousness shall
reign in life through the one Jesus Christ. The recipients of grace are
liberated from the power of Death; they rule in life. An eschatological
reversal takes place. Verse 17, in addition to intensifying the contrast
to the not as . . . so also argument of v. 16, also interprets v. 15:
160
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
161
for all who faithfully commit themselves to God (who receive the
abundance of grace even [rather than and] the free gift of righteousness, (JET) v. 17).
Paul follows through the implications of Christs replacement of
Adam by addressing the laws role in bounding sin in v. 20. He pictures the law as standing alongside, which is widely interpreted as a
negative comment about the law. But that is not the case at all. It
refers to the law standing alongside as a helper to bound sin. The real
question concerns the role of the law standing alongside. Is the purpose of the law to increase sin? Verse 20b is usually interpreted as a
purpose clause. If it is a purpose clause, then God gave the law to
increase human sinfulness. That would be a very problematic understanding from the Jewish perspective. The law is Gods revelation; it
is Gods gift of grace to help the people of God bound and overcome
sin. In forensic apocalyptic, the law is the God-given solution to the
sentence of death that results from the fall of Adam and Eve. In the
Dead Sea Scrolls the law is also Gods powerful instrument to help the
elect overcome evil cosmic powers.
The phrase translated to increase sin can be either a purpose or
a result clause. If it is a result clause, it describes what in fact the law
does. As such, it would then be translated, the law came alongside
with the result that sin increased (JET). The law shows human sinfulness up for what it really is. The fault is not the law, but human sinfulness. Chapter 7:7ff., which is a commentary on v. 20a, favors
interpreting the phrase as a result clause. The problem is Sin, not sinful deeds. The law was not able to bound Sin as power, but could only
show how sinful Sin is. The law intensified and solidified the reign of
Death, because it was not able to overcome the power of Sin. The
law was not able to be part of the solution, but in a strange way
became part of the problem by showing how sinful people were under
the power of Sin. Pauls understanding of the law here hinges on his
understanding of Sin and Death as cosmic powers. The law helped
bound sins, as the Jews believed, but it was not a powerful enough
antidote for Sin.
The good news is that Gods Grace is greater than Sin.
Therefore, the conclusion in v. 21 that grace reigns through righteousness to eternal life is the answer to the entrance and reign of
Death in v. 12.
162
Romans 5:18:39
times). One person does something for the many. There are two
ones in this text, Adam and Christ. Each is a representative figure.
The action of each has universal consequences and introduces cosmic
powers that far transcend the one act: Sin and Death by the one,
Grace and Life by the other. Each has a cosmic legacy. Each creates
and represents a people who live with the effects of each ones action.
There is an Adam people and a Christ people. The concern is the big
picture, the large canvas, not the individual trees.
The focus of the text is Christ and Christs people, not Adam and
Adams people. The text is about good news, not bad news. It is more
about the greatness of Christs salvation than about the greatness of
Adams sin. That is clear in the structure of the text. In every comparison made between Adam and Christ, every phrase that refers to
Adam (vv. 15b, 16b, 17a, 18a, 19a, 21a) is more than counterbalanced by a phrase devoted to Christ (vv. 15c, 16c, 17b, 18b, 19b,
21b). Furthermore, Christ is mentioned in the main clauses, while
Adam is relegated to subordinate clauses. Pauls argumentation is
from the minor (Adam) to the major (Christ). The much more argument is the critical logic. Adam is a problem, a serious problem, but
Christ is much more. Christ corrects not only Adams sin, but also
the sins of all Adams descendants. Paul is explaining the ground for
hope and reconciliation (5:1-11), not the origin and terrible tragedy of
Sin.
The much more argument is even more specific than that Christ
is greater than Adam. Pauls real point is that Life replaces Death. Sin
produces Death, cosmic Death. The salvation that Christ offers must
be more than the forgiveness of sins; the NRSV translation of
v. 18 one mans act of righteousness leads to justification and life for
all men represents a serious misinterpretation that tries to maintain the
old sin-forgiveness typology. The text reads literally, through one
righteous act righteousness of life to all people. The traditional sinforgiveness interpretation of Christs victoryChrists sacrificial death
results in the forgiveness of a persons sinis replaced by the deeper
Death-Life interpretation. The ultimate consequence of Adams sin is
apocalyptic Death. Gods grace that offers no more than forgiveness of
sins is no solution for this terminal condition. Life is needed to overcome Death. Paul pictures the victory of Christ as an apocalyptic event,
not merely as an act of sacrificial love. The victory of Christ addresses
Sin and Death as cosmic powers and slave masters.
The way in which Paul develops this story line of Adam and Christ
is profoundly Jewish, and much more radical than usually thought.
Paul adopts the one Jewish interpretation of Adam as the first and
Romans 5:18:39
163
great sinner, but he rejects the second one of Adam as the first patriarch or as the paradigm of salvation and hope. Christ for Paul is the
first patriarch, the paradigm of salvation and hope. Christ replaces
Adam. Christ is both the Last Adam, the reality of end-time humanity, and the means by which the new humanity is attained, a feature in
Jewish theology not ascribed to Adam.
The uniqueness of Pauls Adam-Christ comparison lies in the shift
from Adam and his people Israel to Christ and his peopleJews and
Gentiles. The role assigned to Israel, in one tradition of Jewish interpretation, has been taken by Messiah Jesus. It is not Israels obedience
that functions to undo Sin and Death, but the obedience of Jesus.
That means the role of the law also changes; it does not bound Sin
but ends up intensifying it by showing the power and pervasiveness of
Sin among the people of the law. Sin can be overcome and the lost
glory (3:23) regained, but only through Messiah Jesus. Paul presents
Jesus as the climax of the Jewish story, because only he introduces an
end-time power strong enough to overcome the power of Sin and
Death.
The magnitude of Christs victory over Sin and Death creates a
problem for many. If Adams sin means universal Sin and Death,
then Christs victory must mean universal salvation. If all are sinners
and die because of Adam, then all must be saved because of Christs
much more salvation. Paul affirms both universality and individual
responsibility. Sin is universalit is a cosmic powerand salvation is
universalit is greater than Sin and reverses the consequences of
Sin. But sin is also personalbecause all sinned (v. 12)and salvation is personalall who receive (v. 17) [Essay: Universalism].
TEXT IN BIBLICAL CONTEXT
164
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
165
1 Corinthians 15Christ defeats Sin and Deathis expounded elsewhere in Paul with other new creation images. Christ is the first born
of a new family in Romans 8:29. In 2 Corinthians 3:18 we all are being
changed (metamorphized) into his image from glory to glory. And in
2 Corinthians 5:17 to be in Christ means to participate in a new creation in which the old has passed away and the new has come. Christ
effects a cosmic transformationhe replaces Sin and Death with Life
and new creation. Christ inaugurates a new age.
TEXT IN THE LIFE OF THE CHURCH
166
Romans 5:18:39
pull everything into its field. Nothing can control or bound it, not even
Gods good and revealed gift of the law. Sin is so powerful that all
sin, all submit to the rule of Sin (well, almost all). Third, v. 12 is really more concerned with the consequence of Sin than Sin itself. Sin
introduced Death, and all die. Pauls starting point is not a theoretical discussion of Sin, but the all-pervasive and fearful reality of
Death. The empirical problem for all people is the coming of the
grim reaper, and that must be changed for God to save humanity
and the world. Death is a function of sin. That is why Paul narrates
the entrance of Sin into the world. But Paul does not discuss the origin of Sin or explore how Death resulted from Adams disobedience;
he simply makes assertions.
Romans 5:18:39
167
in the Anabaptist tradition of the church. The text was central to the
debate between the Anabaptists and the Reformers in the sixteenth
century. The Anabaptists consistently rejected Augustine and Luthers
notion of original sin. They, therefore, also rejected infant baptism
as the means of washing away original sin. Children are born innocent; they inherit no sin that must be cleansed by baptism. Sin, in this
tradition, is a function of adults making wrong choices, disobeying
God. Though children are inclined to sin, not until they are capable as
adults of repenting from sin and accepting by faith Gods grace and
salvation through Jesus Christ are they morally accountable (see
Friedmann, 1973:61-67; 1959:79-82). Friedmann quotes numerous
Anabaptist writers in support of this view. Sebastian Franck, in his
Chronica (1531) puts it this way:
Nearly all Anabaptists consider children to be of pure and innocent blood
and they do not consider original sin as a sin which of itself condemns
both children and adults. They also claim that it does not make anyone
unclean except the one who accepts this sin, makes it his own and is
unwilling to part with it. For they claim that foreign sin does not condemn
anyone, and in this they refer back to the Eighteenth Chapter of Ezekiel.
(fol. 446) (Friedmann, 1973:63)
Not all Anabaptist scholars agree with this representation of the early
Anabaptism on original sin. The issue continues to be debated both by
the historians of Anabaptism and also in the beliefs of the heirs of the
tradition. The 1995 Confession of Faith in a Mennonite Perspective
says:
Sin is part of the human condition; we participate in it. The sin of Adam
and Eve affects all (Rom. 5:12, 19); at the same time, we are held
accountable for our own behavior. As the Anabaptist leader Pilgram
Marpeck wrote, any heritage we have received from our first parents does
not deprive us of our own final responsibility before God (Ezek. 18).
Although human beings have free will, choice is limited. By the grace of
God, we have been given the freedom to choose the bond of covenant
relationship with God or to choose bondage to sin (Rom. 6:16-18), which
leads to final separation from God. (Art. 7.4, p. 33)
These Anabaptists also taught that Christs victory over sin fundamentally changes human nature (it effects an ontological or metaphysical change). Salvation effects more than a change of statusthe
gift of right standing before Godbut in fact makes people righteous. Followers of Jesus are born again, transformed into new
creatures. Therefore, the believers church calls for a life of discipleship
in community consistent with the new nature of the Christian (see
Friedmann, 1952, 1994; van der Zijpp, 1959; Weingart, 1994).
168
Romans 5:18:39
PREVIEW
Romans chapters 68 develop the theme of life in Christ in light of
his victory over Sin. This triumph means that the followers of Jesus
are freed to live a new kind of life, a life that realizes Israels dreams
for the future. These chapters offer one of Pauls great statements on
Christian ethics. Because Christians have died to Sin, they are to live
out the Grace, Righteousness, and Life which they have in Christ.
They do not live out their salvation by their own strengthSin is
too powerful to permit that even with the help of the lawbut by the
power of Christ, the community of Christ (the church), and the Spirit.
Paul urges in these chapters that Roman Christians live out what they
are, that they walk the talk.
Paul describes the new life in Christ by asking and answering three
questions in 6:1-8:11: 1) Should we sin so that grace may abound?
(6:1); 2) May we sin because we are not under the law? (6:15); 3) Is
the law sinful? (7:7). All three questions explore the implications of his
radical assertions in 5:20 that the law results in the increase of Sin,
and that where Sin increases Grace increases much more. Paul treats
the issues in reverse order of the sequence in 5:20: the relationship of
Sin and Grace in 6:17:6, the relationship of law and Sin in
7:78:11. He also reverses the order of treating the subjects in
6:157:6. The sequence in vv. 14-15 is law and grace. He first
explains under grace in 6:16-23 and then under law in 7:1-6.
The structure of the argument from 6:18:11 is an inverted chiasm:
A Radical claim re the law: law increased Sin (5:20)
B Radical claim re Sin: where Sin increased Grace
increased even more (5:20)
B Question re Sin: Are we to continue in sin . . .? (6:1)
C Question re sinning: are we to sin because we are not
under law? (6:15)
D Question re sinning: are we to sin because we are
under grace? (6:15)
D Elaboration on being under grace (6:16-23)
Romans 5:18:39
169
170
Romans 5:18:39
EXPLANATORY NOTES
Several things are noteworthy in this outline of the section. First, the
initial text unit, 6:1-14, is structured into two concentric inclusios:
Sin, law, Grace, 5:20-21reference of 6:1 question
Death, Sin, 6:2statement of thesis
Dead, Sin, 6:11restatement of thesis
Sin, law, Grace, 6:14conclusion
Second, there is a parallel structure between 6:1-3 and 15-16. Both
contain a what question, a second question that states the issue, a
strong denial to the second question, and a third question which calls
attention to the readers knowledge.
6:1-3
1a What then shall we say?
1b Shall we continue?
2a Absolutely not!
3a Do you not know?
6:15-16
15a What then?
15b Are we to sin?
15c Absolutely not!
16a Do you not know?
Romans 5:18:39
171
the law rather than by grace. No one posed grace and law as alternatives; Jews saw the law as the gift of grace to overcome sin.
Paul in Romans breaks the correlation of grace and law because it
limits grace to Israel, the people of the law. The Jewish grace-law correlation runs counter to Pauls gospel that Gods promises, and thus
Gods grace, includes all people, Jews with the law and Gentiles without the law. So, Paul set Grace and Sin in antithesis in 5:20. He also
takes the bold step of linking the law with the Sin side of the antithesis, rather than the grace side or even the midpoint between grace and
sin (gracelawsin instead of gracelawsin, as above). Instead
of saying the law controls or overcomes Sin, Paul says it is inadequate
to deal with Sin (see 8:2). The law ends up increasing Sin, not
decreasing it. To the Jewish affirmation of the law as the means provided by God to deal with sins, Pauls response is heretical.
The question now becomes, if you remove the law as the middle term
between grace and Sin, in what relation do they stand? Still worse, if you
set Gods law on the side of Sin, are you not saying that Sin promotes
grace? If grace no longer gives the law to control Sin, are you not
encouraging Sin so that grace may be experienced? The inference here
is similar to the slanderous charge Paul mentioned and rejected in 3:8.
It is important to see v. 1 in the light of Pauls apocalyptic argument in 5:12-21. Sin is both a ruler and a kingdom, which dominates
humanity; Paul is not talking about sins. The thesis of the false inference is that, since the law no longer functions to control Sin, people
should remain in the old kingdom of Sin in order that the rule of
Grace should increase.
6:2 AnswerThesis
Paul rejects the false inference with absolutely not! He explains that
rejection with a question that emphasizes the present reality of
Christian existence. How can people who have died to Sin still live in
the kingdom of Sin (live in it refers back to Sin)? Paul expects his
readers to answer that it is impossible for Christians to live under the
rule of Sin because they have died to it. The phrase we have died to
Sin is the thesis that Paul now expounds.
172
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
173
174
Romans 5:18:39
means to be transferred from one order of life to another, to be liberated from Sins power and incorporated into the new community of
which Christ is the inclusive representative [Essay: Into/With Christ].
Paul defines baptism into Christ as baptism into his death. Verse
4 adds were buried with him. The goal of the burial via baptism is to
the death. In the ancient world death and burial were one event; a
person was not considered to be fully dead until buried [Essay:
Death/Baptism as Ritual Event]. The point of baptism into death is
that baptism negates Sin. A baptism-sin connection was common in
the early church. John the Baptist and the early church baptized for
the forgiveness of sins (e.g., Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3; John 1:29; Acts
2:38; 22:16; Col. 2:13). Paul is building on a Jewish and early
Christian tradition that links atonement and baptism with cleansing
from sin. But he does not associate baptism with repentance
(metanonia), or forgiveness (aphesis), or sins (hamartiai). Pauls theology of baptism is a combination of baptism as ritual death and as
apocalyptic event. Because Sin is a power that rules, baptism involves
the negation of Sin, liberation from Sin, and transference to the
power and rule of another lord, rather than forgiveness of sins.
Baptism into Christ defined as baptism into Christs death
means that the Christian has been incorporated into Christ as an
inclusive and corporate person who represents a new kingdom.
Christians are people who have made a radical break, they have died
to Sin; they have been transferred from one ruler and his people to
another ruler and his people.
Verse 4 concludes with a purpose clause that is jarring. Paul has
just linked Christians with Christs death. The just as Christ was
raised out of the dead through the glory of the Father should be followed by so also we were raised with him by baptism. The just
asso also parallelism really requires it, as does the through the
glory of the Father. The Christians death through baptism represents a power event, a death to Sin, and should be answered by
another power event. The resurrection of Jesus is a power event in
Paul (see 1:3-4; 4:24-25). Glory is a power word; it describes the
power of God gloriously exercised. The phrase through the glory of
the Father describes a power play, God using power to raise Jesus.
The next power play should be to raise Christians with Jesus, but it is
not. Rather, it is that Christians may live differently in this life. Instead
of claiming that Christians are raised in baptism, Paul compares
Christs being raised with the new moral life of Jesus followers.
Newness (kainos) denotes end-time renewal whereby Christians have
a new quality of life here and now.
Romans 5:18:39
175
vv. 8-10
if question
if we united to the likeness
if we died with Christ (v. 8a)
of his death (v. 5a)
then answer
but also we shall be resurrected
we shall live with him, (v. 8b)
(v. 5b)
explanation and consequences
knowing that our old humanity
knowing that Christ
was crucified so that the
having been raised from
body of sin might be destroyed
the dead, he will never
in order that we no longer be
die, death no longer
slaves of sin, (v. 6)
rules over him, (v. 9)
basis and result
he who has died is made righteous he died to sin once-for-all ...
from sin (v. 7)
he lives to God (v. 10)
The growth together with is Christs death. Verse 5 motivates v. 4c;
it asserts that Christians should walk in newness of life because they
have died a death that is a copy of Christs death. And since that is
the case, Christians also will be united with Christ in a resurrection like
his. The first action, death, is past with ongoing effects (perfect tense).
The second action, resurrection, is future.
176
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
177
no longer rules Christ, Christians who have died with Christ shall not
be slaves of Sin.
Conclusion 11
The mood shifts from declaring what is (the indicative) to command
(the imperative). Because Christians have died to Sin, they must continuously choose to think differently about themselves (logizesthe is
present tense). The new self-understanding is that what is true of
Christ (v. 10) is true of them. Christians are not only dead to Sin, they
are living with God. Christians are living to God in Messiah Jesus, in
the sphere of the corporate body that Christ represents in the world
[Essay: Into/With Christ]. In Christ Jesus must still be understood in
light of the Adam-Christ parallel. It means to live in the kingdom of
Christ rather than the kingdom of Sin. Verse 11 shows why it is
impossible to live in Sin (v. 2). Christians cannot simultaneously be
ruled by Sin and by Christ. Through baptism-death they have been
separated from one kingdom community and incorporated into a different kingdom community.
178
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
179
6:15c-16 AnswerThesis
Paul answers in two ways. First, he issues a forceful denial, absolutely not! Second, he asks a question which at the same time provides
an answer. The question is, do you not know that you are slaves?
The analogy is important. Verses 15-23 are about slavery. The notion
of freedom is present only as a contrast to slavery, not as the fundamental point of the argument. The human condition is defined as
enslavement. A slave is a person who is owned by someone, who is
not free, but must obey the owner.
Clarity about the central argument is important. Paul is not contrasting a good, freedom, and an evil, slavery. He is contrasting two
slaveries. The question outlines the alternative slaveries in the starkest
terms. The options are Sin or OBEDIENCE. Each demands obedience. Each has consequences, death for obedience to Sin, righteousness for OBEDIENCE.
180
Romans 5:18:39
what the Christians were before they became Christians, then, and
what they are now.
Then
slaves of sin, v. 17
Now
obedient out of the heart, v. 17
freed from sin, v. 18
slaves of righteousness, v. 18
yielded members to righteousness,
v. 19
yielded members to
impurity, v. 19
lawlessness, v. 19
slaves of sin, v. 20
free from righteousness, v. 20
ashamed, v. 21
freed from sin, v. 22
slaves of God, v. 22
Romans 5:18:39
181
made for itself in light of her election. Both Israels claim and goal is
a reality for those baptized into Christ.
Second, the categories of the discussion are consistently corporate. The issue is lordship, which by definition involves a community
of people, in this case slave communities that have a different ethos
and live by different ethics. Third, there is only one imperative in the
text unit. Verse 19 concludes the then-now contrast with a just asso
also argument. Just as Christians once reported for service to
uncleanness and lawlessness, so now they must report as servants to
righteousness.
The analogy concludes with a final comparison in v. 23. The provisions of Sin are death. The word normally translated wages really means provision. Slaves were not paid wages (opsonin, provisions, is not misthos, wages). Slaves are given goods to sustain them.
The provisions of the master, Sin, are deadly; they are poisonous, and
produce death when consumed. Christians receive a free gift, eternal
life. The means and context of the gift is Jesus Christ as Lord.
The point of the argument is that baptism means a change of
ownership and a change of community. Followers of Jesus, especially Gentile Christians, have been transferred from the ownership of
Sin to Righteousness (GOD). Transference does not mean freedom.
Rather, it means the transfer from one lord and his community to a
new lord and his community. The one explicit exhortation, and the
implicit exhortation throughout the analogy, is that followers of
Messiah Jesus must live by the rules of the new lord and his community. Verse 17 identifies those new rules as a new pattern of teaching to which Christians were handed over. Christians were made captive to a new teaching, i.e., the gospel and its ethical claims, through
the catechismal instruction they received as new members of the
church. Christians as slaves are to live obediently to the new teaching
of the new lord, freed from sin, slaves of Righteousness and of
GOD.
182
Romans 5:18:39
Ch. 6
6:1 Sin
6:2 We died to sin
6:4 Walk in newness of life
6:7
7:1-6
7:1 Law
7:4 You died to the law
7:6 Serve in the new life of the
Spirit
7:6 We are discharged from
the law, dead to what held
us captive
7:3 Free from the law
Romans 5:18:39
183
(3:20; 5:20) and will develop in 7:7ff., has not alleviated the plight of
Adamic humanity, but rather made it worse. Therefore, Israel is bound
more closely to Sin by the law rather than liberated from it. Through
Messiah Jesus Jewish Christians have been freed from the solidarity,
which bound them to Adam and have entered a new life in Christ.
Now
discharged from the law
dead to what held us captive
The then analysis elaborates 5:20, the reign of Sin. People then
lived in the force field of the flesh; the in the flesh is clearly the negative counter to in Christ. It is the equivalent of in Adam, the old
humanity, the sinful body [Essay: Flesh in Romans]. The law energized Sin, fostered its growth rather than bounded it. It linked Jews
to Adam and resulted in the intensification of Sin. It is the code of an
old era.
184
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
Adam
Sin
In it
Old humanity
Body belonging to Sin
Death
Flesh
Law
185
Christ
Righteousness/God
In Christ
Grace
Life
Spirit
186
Romans 5:18:39
Baptism
While baptism is referred to often in the narrative writings of the New
Testament (e.g., gospels and Acts), the interpretation of its meaning is
found in the various letters. Eleven different texts interpret the meaning of baptism; all in the Pauline writings except Hebrews 10:22 and
1 Peter 3:21. Space does not permit a study of all the texts. Attention
is drawn only to those with thematic parallels to Romans 6.
The context for the interpretation of baptism in Galatians 3:27 is
the change of the agesbefore the coming of the faith (v. 23) people were under the tutorial restraint of the law, but now that the faith
has come (v. 25) they are no longer under custodial care. Therefore,
all are children of God through the faithfulness of Christ (the P46
reading, the earliest manuscript containing the Pauline letters, is preferred to the faith in Christ Jesus reading). People have become children of God because having been baptized into Christ, you have
clothed yourselves with Christ. To be clothed with is to become a
new person, to take on the character, virtues, and intentions of the
person. The result is unity, the elimination of privilege based on
Romans 5:18:39
187
human distinctions, which divide people in the old age, e.g., race,
gender, class. Baptism highlights the new reality of Christian faith, and
the resultant new status of oneness and equality among all believers.
In 1 Corinthians 12 Paul is instructing the Corinthians about the
relationship of the gifts of the Spirit and the unity of the church as the
body of Christ. He grounds the diversity of gifts in the oneness of the
body of Christ (v. 12). The just asso also clause (12d) indicates that
Christ as the body of the community is the foundation for the unity of
the church. Baptism undergirds this unity because diverse people are
baptized by means of one Spirit into the one body.
Paul makes the same point in 1 Corinthians 1:10-17. Divisions in
the church are inappropriate because Christians were baptized into
Christ, not into various leaders in the church. Again baptism unifies
rather than divides people because it incorporates people into Christ.
The baptismal reference in 1 Corinthians 10:1-13 makes a quite
different point. Paul interprets Israels deliverance from Egypt through
the Red Sea as a baptism (into Moses) and the gift of manna in the
wilderness as the Lords Supper. The purpose is to warn the
Corinthians against immoral behavior. Christians are people living
between the ages (to whom the end of the ages has come, v. 11).
Participation in baptism and the Lords Supper does not guarantee
the reality of end-time salvation if the behavior negates the reality of
salvation. The Corinthians are in danger of negating their salvation
through misconduct, just as their forebearers did. New reality demands
new conduct.
Paul consistently interprets baptism in apocalyptic categories.
Baptism negates a past life and incorporates people into a new reality that transforms existing relationships. In Galatians it transcends
privileges based on human distinctions, while in 1 Corinthians 12 it
unifies diversity. Baptism effects a unity of Christian people. The new
quality of life in Christs kingdom community also necessitates a
lifestyle that is consistent with the death of the old age and the realities of the new age (slavery to righteousness, life with God, being
clothed with Christ, participating in the bread and drink of the Lords
Table).
188
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
189
Other dying and rising with Christ texts could be studied (e.g.,
Phil. 3:21; Eph. 2:5f.; Rom. 8:17, 29f.; 2 Tim. 2:11f.). All make the
same basic point that Christians die with Christ and are raised with
him. Sometimes this death is linked to baptism, but at other times it
is not. What is clear is that a real death to a past world occurs and
Christians are transferred to a new world order. The language is corporate and cosmic. A change of ages, of world systems, and of rulers
is being described. Usually resurrection is promised as the completion
point of this transference, although in Colossians 2 that completion is
already a present experience. This dying and rising with Christ is an
eschatological event that is already being experienced by Christians.
To die and rise with Christ means the powers of the old age no
longer enslave (Rom. 6:2f., 7:1f.; Gal. 2:19; 5:24). Christians are no
longer bound by the values of the old world system (Gal. 6:14; 2 Cor.
5:14f.). Christ now lives in Christians (Gal. 2:20), who live by the
Spirit (Gal. 5:25) and are part of a new creation. (Gal. 6:15; 2 Cor.
5:17). The structure of human existence has been fundamentally
altered by dying and rising with Christ. Therefore, these Pauline
texts call the followers of Jesus to live differently and to walk the talk.
TEXT IN THE LIFE OF THE CHURCH
190
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
191
world and to follow Jesus even unto death. Baptism in water and the
Spirit meant a willingness to accept the baptism in blood, death for
obedience to Jesus.
A Narrative Spirituality
Paul conceives of the Christian life as one modeled on Jesusdeath
with Christ, buried with Christ, to be resurrected with Christ. The
believers life corresponds to the life of Jesusobedience to God,
death, burial, and resurrection. To be a Christian is to be like Jesus, to
relive the life Jesus lived. This co-Jesus life suggests a narrative spirituality, a living with and dying with Jesus, which challenges most
modern and post-modern spiritualities. Living like Jesus, rather than
pursuing self-fulfillment, might also address the problem of sin in the
church.
This narrative spirituality says that the modern gospel that God
accepts us the way we are is nothing less than heresy. God calls
Christians to changeto become slaves of Jesus as Lord, to live in
Gods kingdom, and to become soldiers of righteousness in the battle
with evil.
PREVIEW
The question in 7:7, is the law Sin(ful), is the third of the questions
in 6:18:11 that discuss the implications of Pauls statements in 5:20.
Pauls concluding comments in the previous text unit (6:157:6)you
have died to the law (7:4), our sinful passions energized by the law
(7:5), but now we are liberated from the law . . . so that we are serving in the newness of the Spirit and not the antiquated code of the
letter (7:6)require explanation. Does the logic of 5:20 and 7:4-6
not imply that the law itself is Sin(ful)?
The problem is clearly the law. The questions of 7:7 and 7:13
define the issue as the relationship of the law and Sinis the law
Sin? and does the good thing (law) produce death in me? The resolution in 8:1-11 again centers on the law, Christ and the Spirit doing
192
Romans 5:18:39
what the law could not do. Paul in 7:78:11 explains the meaning of
7:5 and 6. Ch. 7:725 elaborates the meaning of the relationship of
law with flesh and Sinall the key words of 7:5 recur (law, flesh, Sin,
passion, members, death). Ch. 8:1-11 interprets the meaning of discharged from the law and serving in the new life of the Spiritthe
key words from 7:6 are explained (law and death, Spirit and new life).
The contrast of the agesthe then-now of 7:5 and 6is also
played outthe I am fleshly, sold under Sin as the then is contrasted with now there is no condemnation in Christ Jesus. In addition to this structural continuity, there is verbal continuity which binds
7:78:11 together. The dominant word from 7:7 through 8:11 is law
(nomos), 20 occurrences in 30 verses plus six uses of commandment
(entol). The specific reference to the law of God in 8:7 picks up the
identical phrase from 7:22 and 25. The dwelling within theme of 7:18
and 20 reappears in 8:9-11. The liberation motif in 8:2 answers the
question of 7:24, who will rescue me. Two other phrases bind the
whole togetherfreed from the law in 8:2 picks up freed from the law
in 7:3, and in Christ in 8:1-2 picks up the in Christ phrase from 6:23.
OUTLINE
The Weakness of the Law Due to the Flesh/Sin, 7:7-25
7:7a-b
First Question: What shall we say? Is the law Sin?
7:7c-d
Thesis
Explanation of the thesis, 7:7e-11
7e-8a First explanation
8b-10 Second explanation
11
Third explanation
Conclusion, 7:12
7:13a
Second Question: did the good [the law] work death in me?
7:13b-d Thesis
Explanation of the thesis, 7:14-25
14-17 First explanation
18-20 Second explanation
21-25 Third explanation
The Fulfillment of the Law Through the Victory of Christ and
the Spirit, 8:1-11
Basic Conclusion, 8:1
Basic Explanation, 8:2
First Elaboration, 8:3-4
3a
The state of the law
3b
The sending formula
Romans 5:18:39
193
4a
The fulfillment of the law
4b
The manner of the laws fulfillment
Second Elaboration, 8:5-10
5
The two power spheres,
6
The consequences of the two powers
7-8 The two powers in relation to God and the law
9-10 The state of the Roman Christians
Second Conclusion, 8:11
PERSPECTIVES FOR INTERPRETING THIS UNIT
Several topics and issues present perspectives that permeate the commentary on this portion of Romans. These are both prefatory to,
inherent in, and crucial to the commentary below:
Grace
God
righteousness
obedience
holiness
eternal life
new life of Spirit
Such an analysis is very problematic for a Jew. The law is the great
revelation and gift of God, so how can it consistently be linked with
Sin? How can Paul include the law among the powers arousing Sin
and leading to sin and death? How is it possible to avoid the blasphemous conclusion that the law itself is Sin? Moreover, lurking behind
that implication is a question about God. If the law is Sin(ful), then
God is a fraud who tricked Israel by giving her evil in the name of
good. Paul must respond to the implications of his analysis. Romans
7:78:11 is his response; it is his explanation of 5:20-21 and 7:5-6.
Second, Paul is making the larger case for Christ as the only
power strong enough to overcome the power of Sin and the consequences of Adam. The law, he has argued, is not able to do that, in
194
Romans 5:18:39
fact it results in the increase of Sin. He must explain why. Paul does
that in 7:13 with two purpose clauses (hina), in order that Sin might
be seen and in order that Sin might become exceedingly sinful. In
5:20 he says the law is very important in Gods plan. Rather than
bounding and freeing from Sin, it serves to focus and concentrate Sin
in one place, in Israel. Why? So that Christ can deal with it and fulfill
the law (8:3-4).
Romans 7:78:11 is about Gods vindication of the law in establishing a new covenant, which renews the one made with Israel in the
flesh and enables the fulfillment of the law in the Spirit. The law itself
is not Sin(ful). It is Gods good gift, but the gift has been subverted by
the powers of the Sin and the Flesh. Gods victory over Sin and the
Flesh in Christ and the Spirit makes possible the fulfillment of the
law. Romans 7 is not about human experience, Pauls or anyone
elses, but about Gods law.
The pattern of the argument is from plight (7:7-25)Sin exploiting the law which leads to death rather than lifeto solution
(7:258:11)Christ and the Spirit overcoming the power of Sin. An
inclusioslavery in 7:6 and 7:25defines the plight and the solution,
slavery to a written code which cannot overcome Sin, and slavery
to the law of God which equals life in the Spirit of the new covenant
and empowers to fulfill the law.
Romans 5:18:39
195
in vv. 14-25. Four major proposals have been argued in the history of
the church: 1) Paul is speaking autobiographically about himself (the
debate then is whether he is speaking of his pre- or post-Christian
life); 2) Paul is speaking about every human being; 3) Paul is speaking
about Adam; 4) Paul is speaking about Israel. The first interprets the
I as personal, while options 2-4 interpret it as a rhetorical form.
There is a growing consensus today that Paul is not speaking autobiographically. A pre-Christian autobiographical interpretation not only
is at variance with every description of first-century Jewish life, but also
contradicts Pauls own statements about his life as a Jew in Galatians
1:13f. and Philippians 3:4f. A post-Christian autobiographical reading
results in a very contradictory picture of the Christian life within a short
space in Romansdied to Sin in ch. 6, I am fleshly, sold under Sin
in 7:14, captive to the law of Sin which dwells in my members in
7:23, no condemnation in 8:1. These dissimilar emphases, coming so
close together, may confuse readers, leading one to wonder if Paul was
confused. But this is not so, as explained below.
The majority opinion favors a reference to every person. It is the
nature of the human condition to struggle with law, expectation, and
demand. A universal reference to human experience is hardly conceivable, however. The text unit is defined by the use of the diatribe,
which, as noted earlier, introduces Jewish agenda. Here the specific
issue is the status of the covenant law, hardly a universal concern of
men and women outside of Judaism.
An influential minority with growing support in recent years argues
for a reference to Adam. Romans 7 does use the language of Genesis
3commandment could be a reference to the command in the
Garden not to eat of the tree of knowledge. Jewish tradition defines
the sin of Adam and Eve as lust or covetousness; the word deceived
me in 7:11 is the word used in Genesis 3:13 (it also is used in 2 Cor.
11:3 and 1 Tim. 2:14 in association with the fall). The sequence in
Genesis and Romans 7 is the same (innocence, commandment,
desire, transgression, death). The motif of knowledge, including
knowledge of good and evil, is prominent in both Genesis 3 and
Romans 7. Sin is personified in both passages, the serpent in
Genesis, a power in Romans. The linkages to the story of Adams fall
in Genesis are so strong that one major commentator has argued that
the I can refer to Adam and only to Adam (Ksemann, 1980). On
this model, v. 9a (apart from the law) refers to the period between
Adam and Moses, vv. 9b-24 to the time from Moses to Christ, v. 25a
to the period initiated by Christ.
An even smaller minority, but one that goes back to Chrysostom in
196
Romans
Romans
197
aspect or condition. Verses 7-12 narrate an event in the past; vv. 1425 describe a condition or state. Part one narrates the arrival of the
law as an event in the life of Israel. Part two describes the continuing
state of Israel living under the Torah. Israel first acts out the fall of
Adam and then the death of Adam. Again, such descriptions of both
event and ongoing state are not unusual in Jewish prayer and confessional literature (e.g., Isa. 63:5-12; Jer. 3:22b-25; Ezra 9:5-15; Jos.
Asen. 12:1-13; Tob. 3:1-6; Bar. 1:153:8; 1QH 1:21-27; 3:19-29;
11:9-10).
EXPLANATORY NOTES
7:7c-d Thesis
Pauls first answer is emphatic, absolutely not! Paul explains with a
but answer. The law is not Sin, but it does have some relation to
Sin, as Paul asserted in 3:20 and 5:13, 20. The law functions to
make Sin known, or to define Sin in categories that people understand and experience. The word for know (ginsk) tends to mean
personal or experiential knowledge. Pauls thesis is that without the
law there is no experience of Sin because there is no definition of
what constitutes Sin.
198
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
199
ments about the law in 7:5-6. The law energizing our Sin(ful) passions is explained as the law making Sin known and Sin using the
law as a base for military operations. The word aphorm in vv. 8 and
11 (opportunity in most translations) pictures the law as a military
basescouts and troops are sent out from this base to spy on and
conquer people. The law itself now does not energize Sin but is used
by Sin to activate sinful behavior and thus enslave people.
Conclusion 7:12
So that (hste) introduces a conclusion. Paul has differentiated Sin
and the law. The problem is Sin, not the law. The law was not able
to give Israel a realm where the power of Sin could not operate. In
Eden and at Sinai the law provided Sin a leverage with which to push
every Israelite into the force field of Sin. The conclusion, and the
answer to the question in v. 7, is that the law is absolved of any
responsibility for Sin. The law is not Sin. Rather, it is holy; it comes
from God. Paul could hardly use a stronger theological word to affirm
the law. It participates in the very nature of God, and is what Israel is
to be before God. And the imperative quality of the law, the commandments, share the attributes of the law. They are holy in origin,
righteous in nature, and good in their effects. The law in whole and in
part reflects the character of God. It is the opposite of Sin. The problem is that Sin is able to use it against its nature.
7:13b-d Thesis
Absolutely not is Pauls first answer. As in v. 7, Paul follows up with a
but answer. But Sin serves a purpose, which is explained in two purpose clauses with through or by means of phrases. The first purpose is that Sin might be revealed through the good working death
in me. The good, which is the law, unmasks Sin and gives it clearly
defined boundaries. The result is that the law works death, because people are pulled across the boundaries by Sin. Works, as a verb (katergazomai), first used in v. 8, is the thematic verb of this section (vv. 13, 15,
200
Romans 5:18:39
17, 18, 20). It means to create or produce. The law creates death by
drawing boundaries which people cross. The second purpose of the law
intensifies the first. The law serves to make Sin sinful to an extraordinary degree. It demonstrates the real character of Sin and its consequences, death. At precisely the time that Sin appears to have conquered the law, the law proclaims Gods will. It fulfills the divine purpose
by revealing the radical sinfulness and awful result of Sin.
vv. 18-20
vv. 21-25
Romans 5:18:39
201
Thanks to God through
Jesus Christ our Lord.
Therefore, then I, I
serve the law of God in
my mind, and in the
flesh the law of Sin.
The argument is clearly repetitive. The first two explanations conclude with the same phrase, I do not do it, but the Sin living in me.
There is progress and intensification within the repetition.
202
Romans 5:18:39
to life
the good
to death
the evil
All the references here denote the Torah. Apart from a clear signal that
a different kind of law is being introduced, such as Paul gives in
vv. 22f., a Torah reference is required by his prior references in
Romans to the law as the Torah of God. Paul returns to an explicit
defense of the law following the implicit defense of the divided I.
Israel wills to do the covenant law, but finds that evil stands in the way.
Paul explains why the law is inadequate as a means of grace to bound
Sin. The law informs the will of Israel, but is not able to empower the
doing. The law is too much the tool of evil to be able to overcome Sin.
Paul further explains the weakness of the law by contrasting two
laws. The contrast is sharpened by another use of the opposites the
good and the evil. The one law, the law of God, is good, and a different law or an anti-law is evil. Here two different laws are clearly
under discussion [Essay: Law in Romans].
the good
law of God, v. 22
law of my mind, v. 23
law of God, v. 25
the evil
different law, v. 23
law of Sin, v. 23
law of Sin, v. 25
The law of God cannot be evil (7:7). The different law is other than
and standing over against the law of God; as evil, it cannot be the law
of God.
Israel prefers the law of God. The inner self (lit., the inner person,
that is the inner center of thinking and willing) and the mind are synonyms for the I. It delights in the law, one of the highest expressions of piety in the Psalms (e.g., 1, 119) and the goal of every good
Jew. The problem is that a war is waging within (in my members) that
takes Israel captive to the law of Sin that also exists in my members.
The language is provocative. Israel has been defeated in war. The cri-
Romans 5:18:39
203
sis of the defeated and broken self, at war and enslaved, is deepened
by Sins creation of an anti-law. Sin living within has created its own
law that takes Israel captive against its will. The captivity of the law in
7:6 has been qualified radically and redefined as captivity to the law
of Sin. The verbs for captivity in 7:6, hold down, and 7:23, speared
down, offer dramatic pictures of the reinterpretation of 7:6 in 7:23.
Israels situation is desperate. The future is death (the body of this
death). Therefore, the anguished confession and cry of v. 24. A dramatic and powerful rescue operation is Israels only hope. The word
for rescue (hruomai) consistently has an eschatological nuance in the
NT. It describes a deliverance from the powers of this age, here Sin
living in the flesh. Paul thanks God for the victory through Christ. He
will interpret the nature and meaning of the victory in 8:1-11.
Paul returns from the brief anticipation of future salvation in
vv. 24b-25a to define the terms of Israels condition. The emphatic
I (lit., I, I) serves the Torah of God in my mind and in the flesh
the law of sin. Israel recognizes that its last hope, the law of God, to
which she wishes to be enslaved rather than to Sin, is incapable of
delivering her. The presumed agent of deliverance has been overpowered and perverted by Sin.
While vv. 24-25 conclude the first part of the argument in
7:78:11, they are also transitional. Verses 24a and 25b summarize
the argument Paul has been making in 7:7-25. Verses 24b-25a anticipate the argument Paul will make in 8:1-11.
204
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
205
brought together in one people and one place, to make possible particular salvation for all, salvation through one person in one place for
the cosmos and all human beings.
206
Romans 5:18:39
7:25b, began with therefore, then (ara oun), and ended with I serve
the law of Sin in the flesh. The counter is therefore, now (ara nun).
Paul offers an eschatological contrast; now describes the reality of
the eschatological future in the present time. Now there is not one
condemnation, no end-time judgment. Such judgment has been eliminated for the ones in Christ Jesus, for those in the body of Christ,
the church. The end-time judgment which Israel deserved for enslavement to Sin, and service to the law of Sin, has been removed.
Romans 5:18:39
207
208
Romans 5:18:39
ing to the Spirit. Two rules or force fields of power are pictured. The
old power structure of the flesh/Sin has been displaced by the new
power structure of the Spirit, which is the Spirit of Christ (vv. 2, 9).
Followers of Jesus walking in the power field of the Spirit fulfill the
law. The fulfillment of the just requirement of the law is not the goal
of Christian doing, but its basis and context. The law is not fulfilled
because it has been internalized (Jer. 31 is not the background), but
because the Spirit has been internalized. The Spirit now lives where
Sin once lived. Therefore, the law is fulfilled.
Romans 5:18:39
Flesh Worldview
hostility to God
disobey the law
death
209
Spirit Worldview
peace with God
fulfill the law
life
Paul addresses his Roman audience directly in vv. 9-10. He personalizes the more abstract worldview discussion with you, and in
the process offers one of his clearest statements on the nature of the
Christian life. Followers of Jesus live under the rule of the Spirit, not
the rule of the flesh, if the Spirit of God dwells in them, which the
Spirit does. Paul makes an assertion, a statement of fact (the if
clause, or conditional sentence, is a fulfilled condition). Followers of
Jesus are people of the Spirit, people who live in the worldview and
power sphere of the Spirit. Paul adds, a person who does not have
the Spirit of Christ does not belong to Christ, that is, is not a
Christian.
The result of having the Spirit, and thus being a follower of Jesus,
is stated in v. 10. If Christ is in you (which he is), the body [is] dead
because of Sin and the Spirit [is] life because of righteousness.
Pauls opening, Christ in you, is unusual. He normally talks about
believers in Christ (the only comparable phrase is Christ lives in me
in Gal. 2:20). Christ in you is synonymous with you in the Spirit,
Spirit of God dwells in you, and Spirit of Christ has in v. 9. The
Spirit is defined as the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ. The context of the Spirit is described as in you (plural), or with the possessive
have. The two references to the Spirit and the Christ in you phrase
are synonymous descriptions of the Spirit worldview or power sphere.
The equation of three different terms to describe the reality of the Spirit
is characteristic of Paul. For Paul, Messiah Jesus is the fullest manifestation of God. The Spirit is the Spirit of God and of Jesus. The church
is the body of Christ and the fellowship of the Spirit. The one Spirit
constituted one body, one community of those who received the Spirit.
The followers of Jesus, Jew and Gentile, at one and the same time are
the body of Christ, possess the Spirit of God, and have Christ present
in the community. Thus, Christ in you is not primarily an individual
experience. It was always an experience in Christ, that is, within the
body of Christ. To be in Christ is to share in the surge of charismatic
life which flowed from the Spirit and within the Christian community.
It was essentially a social rather than an individualistic phenomenon.
To live according to the Spirit is to live within the community of
the Spirit that is shaped by the Spirit worldview given by God. The
result of living in the power sphere of the Spirit is life. The quality of
210
Romans 5:18:39
that life is described as the body is dead because of Sin and the
Spirit is life because of righteousness. Paul is talking here about the
life in the Spirit. He is not contrasting two forms of life, life in the flesh
and life in the Spirit. Therefore, the body is dead because of Sin is
a reference to the death to Sin of the Spirit led, Christ possessed,
people (a summary of ch. 6). The people in whom Christ is present
have died to Sin, and thus are released from its controlling power.
They also experience the life-giving quality of the Spirit because of the
righteousness of God revealed in the world through Messiah Jesus.
Righteousness language, reintroduced for the first time since 6:20, is
presented as the antithesis to Sin as in ch. 6. The Spirit gives life,
because the righteousness of God has overcome Sin.
Romans 5:18:39
211
212
Romans 5:18:39
Romans
what the law was unable to do
God sent his Son
in the likeness of sinful flesh
as a sin offering,
and condemned sin in the flesh
Romans 5:18:39
213
God deals with Sin by sending Messiah Jesus, who identifies fully
with the human condition and redeems from that condition. In both
Romans and Galatians the redemption in Christ does something to
the law, fulfills the law in Romans, redeems those confined by the law
in Galatians. In both letters this description of Christs redemption is
followed immediately by a discussion of the role of the Spirit in making followers of Jesus, Jew and Gentile, children of God who pray the
distinctive Christian prayer, Abba! Father! (See the exposition of
8:12-30 for a further discussion of this parallel.) The structure of salvation in both letters looks like this:
God sends the son;
the son redeems;
redeemed people live in the Spirit.
The life in the Spirit theme is developed in parallel ways in both
letters. The Spirit is the power that overcomes the flesh and that
makes possible the fulfillment of the law in Galatians 5:16-26, just as
in Romans 8:4-11. The flesh and the Spirit are opposites; the singular fruit of the Spirit stands over against the many works of the
flesh. Those who belong to Christ (lit., are of Christ) crucify the flesh
and order their lives by the Spirit. People who walk in the Spirit and
exhibit the fruit of the Spirit fulfill the law. Law and Spirit belong
together, in contrast to the opposition of Spirit and flesh, because
people empowered by the Spirit live the law.
TEXT IN THE LIFE OF THE CHURCH
Romans 7:78:11 is primarily about God and the goodness of God.
It is not about schizoid and frustrated humanity. This text is about theology rather than anthropology.
214
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
215
to tempt human beings, to lead them into sin, or equally bad, to permit them to think that their obedience fulfills the will of God and
makes them righteous. Men and women struggle with the law before
grace, and after grace.
Third, Augustine, Luther, Cranfield, and people of like mind, are
interpreting Romans 7 for Christianized societies. Their worldview
is Constantinian. Such a worldview must explain the problem of massive sin and disobedience in the church and in the Christian culture.
The language of inner struggle and the divided self helps justify the
reality of fallenness in the church and the culture.
A Different Reading
All of this is far removed from Paul and first-century Judaism. Gone is
the deeply held conviction in Judaism that the law is Gods good gift
of grace to protect people from sin. Delight in the law, whether
Psalm 119 or Romans 7, is incomprehensible. In fact, in this scheme
Jews, including Paul and the apostles, are ungodly people before
becoming Christians who could not delight in the law and who could
not do the law.
Paul himself, let alone volumes of Jewish literature, paints a very
different picture. He has a robust conscience, rather than a tortured
conscience victimized by guilt. He is proud and confident of his Jewish
heritage and faith; it is a good thing (Phil. 3). The law is Gods good
law, which he seeks to do as a Jew and which Christ brings to fulfillment for Christians who live in the Spirit. Nothing in Pauls letters
reflects a personal struggle in his Christian life. Romans 7 certainly
says nothing about life in Christ, let alone about a struggle in the faith.
The Christian faith is eschatological good news. Paul did not leave
Judaism because he was frustrated and unfulfilled. Rather, Paul argues
that Messiah Jesus brings Judaism and its quest for life through the
law to fulfillment.
Romans 7 is about God, not the struggle of men and women with
God. The agenda is defined clearly as the law by the questions in 7:7
and 13, and by the fulfilment of the law in Christ and the Spirit (8:111). Paul offers a ringing affirmation of the law. The law, even in its
function of defining and intensifying Sin, serves the purpose of concentrating Sin in one place and one people so that God can deal with
it. The law serves the purpose of God by enabling God to defeat Sin
once and for all through Jesus. Messiah Jesus brings the law to fulfillment by doing what the law was not able to do, condemning Sin in
its force field, and placing Jewish and Gentile believers in the power
field of the Spirit.
216
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
217
218
Romans 5:18:39
Children of God
Romans 8:12-39
PREVIEW
Chapters 58 are bounded by the reality of a new relationship with
God. As noted earlier, there is a thematic and verbal similarity
between 5:1-11 and 8:12-39. A key term is hope based on being
made righteous, which creates a confidence of salvation from eternal
death. The new relationship is described as peace with God (5:1;
8:31-34), endurance of suffering (5:2ff.; 8:18-39), and the love of
God (5:5-8; 8:35-39).
The text is unified by the theme of Jesus followers being the children of God (vv. 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 21, 23, 29). As so often in
Pauls letters, his concluding thought in one section provides the
bridge to the next text unit. Verses 12-17 constitute an elaboration of
v. 9, the Spirit dwelling in you, and vv. 18-30 explain the meaning
of vv. 10-11, the Spirit will give life.
The themes of the letter are drawn together into a new argument
that is cosmic in its vision. The covenant purpose of God is fulfilled in
Christ and the Spirit. Christs people are the children of God, the title
of Israel going back to the Exodus and the eschatological hope of the
Jews. All creation will be renewed with the revelation of the new character of redeemed people. Suffering is part of this identity and revelation, just as it was for the Jews. The center of this cosmic transformation is Christ. He is the first-born among many believers, and the
one who will guarantee the triumph of God over all suffering and all
powers. The vision is grand. The destiny of Israel is fulfilled in Messiah
Jesus and the new family who become the heirs of God with him.
OUTLINE
The Spirit and Family Relationships, 8:12-17
8:12-13 Summary
8:14
Thesis
8:15-17 Elaboration of the thesis
The Triumph of Glory Over Suffering, 8:18-30
8:18
Thesis
Romans 5:18:39
219
220
Romans 5:18:39
in the flesh and life in the Spirit. Only the latter fulfills the law and
gives life. With this summary Paul concludes his discussion of ethical
concerns arising from the greatness of Christs salvation that began
with 6:1. He now returns to the magnitude of salvation in Christ, the
subject of ch. 5.
14 Thesis
Paul expands the reference to the Spirit by stating the thesis that articulates the real point of the text unit. As many as permit themselves
to be led by the Spirit of God are children of God. He again summarizes the previous descriptions of life in the Spirit. To be led by the
Spirit is a synonym for to walk according to the Spirit, to have the
worldview of the Spirit, to be in the Spirit, to have the Spirit (vv. 413). Pauls provocative thesis is that people who choose to live in the
Spirit are incorporated into the family of God as sons and daughters.
Pauls thesis introduces language that dominates and unifies 8:1239. Several different terms and one phrase are used to describe
Christians as members of Gods family, sons of God in the Greek and
RSV (vv. 14, 19), children of God (vv. 16, 17, 21), adoption as children (vv. 15, 23), conformed to the image of his son (v. 29), many
brothers/sisters (v. 29). This family terminology is significant for
Pauls audience. To be children of God is the unique privilege of Israel
in the OT and Judaism (see, e.g., Exod. 4:22-23; Deut. 14:1; 32:56; Isa. 1:2-4; 30:9; 63:8; Hos. 1:10; 11:1; Wis. 12:7, 21; 16:10,
21, 26; 18:13; 19:6; Sir. 36:17; 1 En. 62:11; Jub. 1:24-25; 2:20;
Pss. Sol. 17:30; As. Mos. 10:3, 4; Sib. Or. 3:702; 5:202; 3 Macc.
6:28). This status, linked to election and calling, is what distinguished
Israel from the nations. Children of God is synonymous with people
of God. The language applied especially to Jews in apocalyptic literature. Sonship became synonymous with righteous. The ones made
righteous are the children of God, and the children of God are the
righteous ones. Furthermore, it is associated in apocalyptic literature
with rescue from humiliation, oppression, destruction, and death. The
rescue is this-worldly in literature that pictures redemption as a historical process, and other-worldly in literature that anticipates a meta-historical redemption. The point is that the status of children of God
preserves this people through suffering of all kinds. Even the greatest
oppressors in the cosmos cannot invalidate this family status.
Pauls thesis is that all, Jew and Gentile, who choose to live in the
Spirit are children of God. Their status is defined by the Spirit, not by
faithfulness to the law or certain symbols of the law (e.g., works of
law). Followers of Jesus who live in the Spirit, which fulfills the law
Romans 5:18:39
221
(vv. 4-11), enter into the historic and eschatological privileges of Israel.
Together with v. 9, Paul is defining the Christian life in terms of life in
the Spirit and the new status of a family relationship with God.
222
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
223
18 Thesis
Paul introduces the thesis by setting in confrontation the present reality of suffering and future glory. The suffering Christians experience
in the present age (lit., the now time) cannot be compared with the
end-time glory to be revealed.
Paul explains the thesis in three subunits that deal with creation
(vv. 19-22), Christians (we, vv. 23-25), and the Spirit (vv. 26-30).
Recurring words and themes run through these sections: groaning
(vv. 22, 23, 26), hope (vv. 20, 24, 25), expectation (vv. 19, 23, 25),
children of God (vv. 19, 21, 23, 29). The whole is tied together by the
keyword groaning (stenazein). Each subunit has its own theme: freedom versus slavery (vv. 19-22), eager expectation sustained by hope
(vv. 23-25), the intercession of the Spirit for the Christian (vv. 26-30).
224
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
225
The time between the two moments of receiving the Spirit and the
resurrection of the body is a time of groaning. Christians, because of
the Spirit, groan in longing for complete redemption. Spirit possession does not distance Christians from creation, but rather intensifies
the solidarity with creation both in suffering and in hope for full salvation.
226
Romans 5:18:39
The ongoing crisis of faith, or the depth of Christian groaning together with the created order, could hardly be pictured more graphically.
Believers have the status of being children in a new intimate family
relationship with God, but they are not able to communicate properly with God. The experience of contradiction living between the ages
is profound. Christians are totally dependent on the help of the Spirit
and Christ.
The fact that the Spirit prays according to Gods will means that
we know something. What is known is described in two that clauses, the first in v. 28 and the second in vv. 29-30. The first thing that
believers know is that God works all things to the good to the ones
loving God. As the footnotes in most Bibles indicate, v. 28 has some
serious text critical problems. The translation just given favors the
longer reading of the earliest manuscripts (P46, A, B). God is the subject of the action, and all things the object. In the midst of the uncertainty, even the crisis caused by suffering and by inadequate communication, Paul assures his readers that God can be trusted and that
God wills and works the good for the members of the family. The children of the family are defined as the ones loving God and the ones
called according to purpose. The verb to love is used here for the
first time to characterize the response of believers to God. Those who
love God, usually combined with and keep his commandments, is a
characteristic description of pious people in Judaism (Deut. 7:9; Ps.
145:20; Tob. 13:12, 14; Sir. 1:10; 2:15, 16; Pss. Sol. 4:25; 10:3;
14:1; 4QpPs. 3:4-5). Paul both identifies with this understanding and
breaks with it by using only the first half. The second description is
equally Jewish. Gods purpose and election (calling) are two sides of
the same coin. The heritage of Israel is used to characterize believers,
Jewish and Gentile. Christians are people who love God and who are
elected according to Gods purpose.
The second thing that Christians know is that those whom God
foreknew God predestined to be conformed to the image of his
Son (v. 29). Paul uses five verbs heavy with scriptural and Jewish
meaningforeknowledge, preordained (or predestined), called, made
righteous, glorifiedto describe the activity of God in behalf of believers. Foreknowledge does not just mean advance knowledge, but the
choice (really election) that accompanies such knowledge. Preordain
or predestine adds that God has a plan for the elect. The Christian
community is defined as Gods elect people; Paul is not talking here
about the election of individual human beings (more on this topic in
the discussion of ch. 9). The election and the plan is to be conformed
to the being of the Son, to become like the reality the Son embodies.
Romans 5:18:39
227
228
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 5:18:39
229
ch. 4). If Pauls reference is to the same event, his point is different.
His focus is the faithfulness of God. Precisely because God is faithful,
as evidenced in the not sparing and giving up Jesus, Paul asks the
third question, how shall he not also with him give us all things?
The all things (ta panta) refers to all created reality. God through
Christ gives everything to all the sons and daughters in the family (see
also 4:13the descendants of Abraham inherit the world).
230
Romans 5:18:39
ment of the one loving them. The one loving them is Christ in v. 35
and God in v. 39. Jesus as the Messiah embodies the covenant love
of God so that the two can be cited as synonyms of the divine love for
the children of God. Paul has been and is persuaded (perfect tense)
that none of the powers of the cosmos will be able to separate Gods
children from the love of God. The paired list of powers is formidable
death/life as definitions of the human condition in chs. 58;
angels/rulers as supernatural intermediaries in the heavens and political leaders on earth in the governance of the nations and Israel;
things presentthings to come as all dimensions of time; powers as
powerful supernatural beings; height/depth as symbols of heavenly
and subterranean realities; any other creature to cover anything else
in the cosmos. None of these powersvisible or invisible, heavenly or
politicalwill be able to drive a wedge between the people of God and
the love of God. Whatever power these powers may use against us
(v. 31), the love of God is greater.
Paul summarizes his argument with the confident assertion that
God is for us. The election and the love of God, two sides of the same
coin in Jewish thought, are linked in a ringing affirmation of Gods
commitment. To be children of God means preservation and victory
despite the struggles and suffering of living in history.
Romans 5:18:39
231
well. The glory of God was exchanged for the image of the mortal
human being. All this is reversed in 8:12-39. Believers recognize God;
they are led by the Spirit of God. They are to be revealed as the children of God. And when that happens all creation will be liberated.
God, however, not humans, effects the reversal. God in Christ replaces
fear, creation in travail, decay, frustration, groaning, and suffering with
the revelation of the children of God, liberation from bondage and
decay, glorification.
Finally, all the blessings promised to Israel are now given to those
in Christ. The ideas and themes that have characterized Israels selfunderstanding as the people of God are applied without any kind of
qualification to Gentiles as well as Jews. In fact, Pauls use of historic
Jewish categories is so complete that it creates a serious problem. If
Paul is correct, what happens to Israel? The question 8:12-39 raises
becomes the subject of the next major section of the letter, chs. 911.
As so often in Paul, the conclusion of one argument sets up the agenda for the next.
TEXT IN BIBLICAL CONTEXT
The central theme of 8:12-39being children of Godis linked to a
sending formula in Romans 8 and the role of the Holy Spirit that Paul
uses to interpret the meaning of Jesus and the Christian life. The
structure of the text is parallel to Galatians 4:4-7.
Romans 8
Galatians 4
v. 4 But when the fullness of
time came,
232
Romans 5:18:39
Galatians
The sending of Gods son
Saving result re law
Adoptions as children
Presence of the Spirit
Abba! Father! prayer
Heirs
Romans 5:18:39
233
234
Romans 5:18:39
problem in history, which Paul answers with the end-time transformation of Gods people into the likeness of Christ. The antidote to
suffering is the glorification of Gods people.
The centrality of the children of God is underlined once more by
the repeated all in the concluding phrases of ch. 8: God works all
things to the good to the ones loving God (v. 28); God gave up the
son in behalf of us all (v. 32); God will give us all things with him
(v. 32); We are more than conquerors in all these things through
the one having loved us (v. 37); not one thing in all creation will be
able to separate us from the love of God (v. 39).
The gospel is the power of God for salvation (1:16). It demonstrates that God reveals end-time righteousness, which is defined here
as God for us. The us describes the family of God, composed of
Jews and Gentiles, which will be blessed by God in ways that will
transform history and creation.
The inclusiveness of the family of GodJews and Gentiles in the
first centurycalls for a new sociology of the church in the twentyfirst century: Christians of wealthy and poor nations, Christians of the
west and the east, Christians of the north and the south. If God is for
all followers of Jesus, as God is, then the transforming power of the
gospel must be expressed in an inclusiveness that transcends western
upper and middle class ideologies and values. The profound suffering
of many Christians and churches in the worldWestern and nonWesternmust become a passionate concern and cause of the church
of Messiah Jesus and the Spirit.
Romans 5:18:39
235
236
Romans 5:18:39
Romans 9:111:36
238
Romans 9:111:36
The connections with what has preceded are many and critical.
Chapter 8 describes Jesus followers as adopted children (v. 15) who
look forward to eschatological adoption (v. 23). Chapter 9 lists such
adoption as the first privilege of Israel (v. 4). Chapter 8 calls Christians
children of God (sons and children, vv. 14, 16f., 19, 21). Chapter 9
speaks of Israelites as children (v. 8) and sons (v. 26). Both chapters
link adoption as children with the calling of God (8:28, 30; 9:7, 12,
24, 25, 26); both see the elective purposes of God at work (8:28;
9:11); both present glory as the goal of Gods plan (8:18, 21, 29;
9:23). In short, both chs. 8 and 9 have in common the language traditionally used to describe the privileges and identity of Israel; one uses
the language to describe the scope and magnitude of Gods salvation,
the other to defend Gods integrity in relation to Israel. The latter is
necessary because of the former. The problem of God in ch. 9 is a
function of the eschatological blessings of God on all people in ch. 8.
The divine design seems to have collapsed because God is giving
others what was promised to Israel.
The connections within Romans go even deeper than ch. 8.
Chapters 911 return to the questions and themes of ch. 3; they really exposit the meaning of ch. 3. Notice the parallels:
3:1-2
3:3-4
9:1-5
9:6-13
Romans 9:111:36
239
teousness they did not pursue while the Jews are not fulfilling the law
they are pursuing?are introduced by what, therefore, shall we say?
The other questions in chs. 9 and 109:19, 20-21, 22-23, 32; 10:1415, 18-19 are clearly second-order questions. The third and fourth
major questions in 11:1 and 11:11has God rejected his people?
and have the Jews stumbled so as to fall?are introduced by I, therefore, say . . . Three of the four major questions are denied by the
absolutely not! answer, while none of the other questions are negated. Secondly, Paul shapes his answer by the exposition of Scripture
35 of the 90 verses in chs. 911 contain direct quotations of biblical
texts (the 39% citation rate is higher than any place else in Pauls writings; the next is 28% in Rom. 4, and 25% in Gal. 3). Chapters 911
offer an interpretation of Israels Scripture. If the question is has the
word of God failed? then the answer must come from an explanation
of the word of God. That is what Paul offers throughout Romans 911.
At a structural level, this reinterpretation of Israels Scriptures
retells Israels story from Abraham (9:6f.) through the Messiahs fulfillment of that story (10:4) to Pauls own mission to Israel and the
world (10:14-21). It is at the same time a retelling of the story narrated by Paul already in 7:78:11. Gods gift of the Torah became an
occasion for stumbling (7:7-25 and 9:3010:3). God again brings the
Torah to fulfillment through Messiah Jesus (8:3-4 and 10:4).
The argument of chs. 911 is introduced with Pauls personal
lament about Israels state, 9:1-5. It is the first of four times Paul interjects himself into the discussion in these chapters, each at an important
turning point in the argument. In 10:1-2 he prays for Israels salvation
and bears witness that she has a zeal for God, albeit an ignorant zeal.
There is evidence in 11:1 that God has not rejected Israel because he
has called a remnant. In 11:13-14 he defines his own ministry to the
Gentiles as a means to make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save
some of them. Pauls story is an integral part of Israels story.
The thesis of chs. 911 is stated in 9:6, the word of God has not
failed. Everything that follows in chs. 911 is designed to support the
opening assertion that God is faithful and can be trusted. The argument proceeds in three main sections:
9:6-29
Gods word has not failed;
9:3010:21 Christ is the fulfillment of the Word of God;
11:1-32
God has not rejected Israel.
A doxology concludes the argument, 11:33-36.
There is a parallelism between the first and the third arguments
240
Romans 9:111:36
11:1-32
Abraham, v. 1
Their ancestors, v. 28
Jacob, v. 26
Call, v. 29
Election, vv. 5, 7, 28
Harden, vv. 7, 25
Have mercy, vv. 30, 31, 32
The mercy, v. 31
To love, v. 28
A remnant, v. 5
Will be saved, v. 26
The middle argument clearly has a different form. The three arguments form an ABA chiasm. Each argument in turn is developed by
three sub-arguments.
For many centuries, interpreters, especially Protestants, thought
Romans 911 was marginal in the letter. The chapters were either an
excursus or a sermon that Paul had preached elsewhere and, for reasons that are not clear, inserted into the letter between chs. 8 and 12.
Romans, on this view, really should be read by moving from ch. 8 to
12. More recent interpretation sees chs. 911 as the climax of the letter. They offer the solution to deep theological questions about God
that are raised in chs. 18, but not addressed until here.
PREVIEW
Paul begins with a lament, an emotional statement of his own feelings
and desires. It is designed to evoke compassion for the Jews from the
Gentile Christians, and to help them embrace his deep desire that they
fulfill their destiny in the plan of God.
The pathos Paul feels is increased by the sequence of double
expressions in vv. 1-3:
Romans 9:111:36
241
I am not lying
in the Holy Spirit
continual pain
from Christ
my kinspeople by race.
Paul identifies deeply with his own people. The issue of Israels destiny is very personal, as the repeat of his concern in 10:1 indicates.
OUTLINE
The Oath, 9:1-2
The Wish, 9:3
The Privileges, 9:4-5
EXPLANATORY NOTES
242
Romans 9:111:36
Romans 9:111:36
243
PREVIEW
Paul states the thesis of chs. 911 and the first argument, 9:6-29, in
9:6a: Gods word has not failed. The argument is framed as an inclusio by the word seed (sperma) in vv. 7 and 29 (descendants and children in most translations). Both verses are scriptural citations, Genesis
21:12 in v. 7, and Isaiah 1:9 in v. 29. Two other key words are used
to unify the text and the various other scriptural citations. First, the
244
Romans 9:111:36
Romans 9:111:36
245
246
Romans 9:111:36
and his descendants) are reckoned as seed. The commentary is supported with another Scripture citation, Genesis 18:10. The son born
to Sarah is a gift of divine promise and initiative, I will come.
Pauls first point is that from the beginning God has made a differentiation within Israel:
Ethnic Israel
the ones not out of Israel
Abrahams children
the children of the flesh
True Israel
Israel
seed
the children of God
the children of promise
seed
son
Romans 9:111:36
247
addition to vv. 7 and 11). Second, Paul has reintroduced one of the
critical phrases in the letter, out of works. It is an important phrase in
the developing argument (e.g., 9:32, 11:6). Out of works is contrasted here with out of calling, not with out of faith as earlier in the
letter. The issue is the calling of God, not making righteous by faith.
Paul rejects both salvation by birth (Isaac), and salvation by works
(Jacob). Election (i.e., salvation) is based solely on Gods call, and has
been so from the beginning of Israels story. Third, election language
here is corporate language, not individual. Paul is talking in salvation
history terms: God chose a people through Isaac rather than Ishmael
and through Jacob rather than Esau to be the people of the covenant
and of promise.
Pauls point is clear. Salvation is based exclusively on the call of
God. God never promised to save all ethnic Israel, so the rejection of
Messiah Jesus by the majority of Jews does not undermine the integrity of Gods word. Pauls argument suggests that this rejection is a sign
that Israel stands outside the Abrahamic covenant and thus the people of God. Israel now stands where Ishmael and Esau once stood.
248
Romans 9:111:36
Romans 9:111:36
249
250
Romans 9:111:36
Romans 9:111:36
251
252
Romans 9:111:36
not collapsed for two reasons: it was never intended to apply to Israel
alone, and the inclusion of the Gentiles has been on precisely the
same grounds as Israels election. Furthermore, God is just toward ethnic Israel. Not only does her unbelief deserve judgment, but this judgment was foretold by the prophets. In fact, Isaiah predicted it would
be so severe that only a remnant would be saved. And, as in the past,
God is using Israels current unbelief to show mercy to others.
Romans 9:111:36
253
254
Romans 9:111:36
people are all plural. God is electing a new people composed of Jews
and Gentiles in creating a new vessel.
Pauls continued discussion of election in ch. 11 reinforces the
themes of ch. 9, but also reaffirms the faithfulness of God to the election of Israel. Election of a remnant to represent the whole is by grace,
not works (vv. 5-6). Israel as a whole failed to attain that election (v. 7)
because it pursued its own national righteousness rather than the
righteousness of God (10:3f.). But, God will yet save Israel as a people. Why? Because Israel as a people is elect; as regards election they
are beloved for the sake of their forefathers for the gift and the call
of God are irrevocable (11:28b-29).
Election language in the Bible is about GodGods choosing and
faithfulnessand about peoplehood. God is the one who elects. A
people is created by election, first Israel and then the church composed of Jews and Gentiles.
TEXT IN THE LIFE OF THE CHURCH
Romans 9:6-29 is about the faithfulness of God to the covenant and
promises to Israel despite Israels rejection of Messiah Jesus. The
Christian church has made this a text about the churchs displacement
of Israel, about the foreknowledge of God in election, and about Gods
election of some individuals to salvation and some to damnation (double predestination). The latter two interpretations led to endless
debates about the relationship of divine sovereignty and human free
will.
Displacement Theology
By the second-century Gentile Christians lost interest in the questions
of God raised by Jewish rejection of Jesus. As Pauls burden for the
salvation of the Jewish people became increasingly foreign to the
church, the meaning of the text was turned on its head. The dominant
interpretation from the second century onward became the substitution model, the church replaced Israel, the church is the new Israel.
Election became a message about Gods rejection of the Jews and the
selection of the Gentiles. The destruction of Jerusalem was the key
evidence that God had judged the Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus.
They were now a people without land, temple, altar, sacrifices,
prophets, priests; and none of these would ever be restored again.
The God who blesses faithful Jews and judges unfaithful Jews but
always remains loyal and faithful to this people in Romans 9 was
changed into a God who has withdrawn loyalty from them forever,
and now blesses good Christians and judges bad ones. The Jews
Romans 9:111:36
255
Theology of Predestination
Beginning with Origen in the third century A.D., a second theme
emergedthe relationship of the sovereignty of God to individual
human free will. As outlined by Origen, God foreknew the behavior of
persons, and elected them to salvation or damnation accordingly.
Gods election of people was based on their intention and actual
behavior.
The concern for Gods foreknowledge in the Greek fathers hardened into a theology of predestination with Augustine, early-fifth century, and in Latin theology. The leading interpretation of Romans 9
in the West asserted that this text is about the predestination of some
to grace and others to damnation. Jewish unbelief was simply an
example of the latter. The purpose of Romans 9, then, is to underline
divine sovereignty in the age of grace without regard for human works
or will. Human free will is totally enslaved by sin, and thus under the
judgment of God. Protestant interpreters, led by Luther and Calvin,
built on this tradition.
The fundamental assumption underlying the Augustinian and
Protestant interpretation of Romans 9 is that Pauls primary concern
is the eternal salvation or damnation of individual persons. The Jewish
people are nothing more than examples of people damned because
of unbelief. It is hard to imagine a more radical reinterpretation of
Pauls meaning in Romans 9, or a more dangerous and damaging
interpretation in the history of the church. This interpretation resulted in a long history of hostility toward the Jewish people that reached
its apex in the Nazi Holocaust.
256
Romans 9:111:36
Romans 9:111:36
257
PREVIEW
The second argument in chs. 911 proceeds from the conclusion just
drawn, that election of a new vessel of Jews and Gentiles demonstrates Gods faithfulness. That conclusion raises a question about
Gentile inclusion and Jewish exclusion. If God is creating a new vessel, why are Gentiles responding affirmatively to this new reality, but
the Jews as a people are rejecting it?
The form of the argument at the beginning (9:30-33) and the end
(10:14-21) is the diatribe. The answers to the questions, as well as the
central section of the unit, involve extensive Scripture citation and
interpretation.
The argument is framed by an inclusioGentile inclusion in 9:30
and 10:20, Jewish exclusion in 9:31 and 10:21. The use of two
quotes from Isaiah to complete the inclusio in 10:20-21 highlights the
importance of the issue. The contemporary realitythe Gentiles find-
258
Romans 9:111:36
ing the prize even though they are not in the race, while the Jews
have not reached the finish line even though they have run hardis a
fulfillment of Gods word.
The explanation of the current dilemma is further framed by the
use of language from earlier in the letterrighteousness, law, faith,
works. The use of this language in Romans can be plotted like this:
1:16- 3:20 68
18 5:21
righteousness 1
14
6
faith (noun)
3
20
0
faith (verb)
1
7
1
law
0
17
30
works
0
5
0
9
0
0
0
0
1
9:30
10
11
5
8
4
1
11
1216
0
1
0
0
1
1
7
3
2
1
Romans 9:111:36
10:9
10:12a
259
260
Romans 9:111:36
In contrast, Israel raced with all its might after the righteous law
(nomon dikaiosun). The goal is the law, not the righteousness of
the law as in most translations (that would require dikaiosun nomou).
The law is defined as righteous in 7:12 (nomon dikaiosun is a subjective genitivelit., law of righteousness or the law which is righteous); it is the standard which defines what God requires of the
covenant people. Israels goal was the law, but it did not win the race
and get the prize (lit., to the law not it attained). The double mention of the law as the goallaw of righteousness and law as the
goalis deliberate. Israel did not pursue righteousness, but the law.
The fact that Israels not reaching the goal of the law is parallel to the
Gentiles attaining righteousness indicates that for Paul both goals are
closely related. They are parallel, not opposed to each other as in
much Protestant interpretation.
The startling contrast between Gentiles and Israel and the shocking analysis of Israels failure raises the second question (v. 32a), why
(lit., on account of what?). The question is, why did the Jews not
reach the goal of the law? Paul offers two answers, 9:32b-33 and
10:2-3, each involving a contrast. The answers are interrupted by a
personal lament for Israels failure (10:1).
The first answer for Israels failure is because not out of faith but
out of works (v. 32b). The contrast is the earlier out of faith/out of
works of law. Israels problem is not the goal, the law, but the means
of pursuing the goal. Paul does not disparage the law. Israel raced after
a good goal in the wrong way, by means of Jewish ethnocentrism
[Essay: Works of Law], which excluded the Gentiles instead of by faith
(or faithfulness) which is an option for all peoples (some manuscripts
read works of law rather than simply works). Paul explains Israels failure by another race metaphor, she stumbled on a stone. The stumbling
image is interpreted by a mixed Scripture citation from Isaiah 28:16
(behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a stone of offense)
and 8:14 (and the one faithing it [or him] will not be ashamed).
The stone image and the Isaiah citations have historically been
interpreted to mean Israels rejection of the Messiah. But the reference is the law, not the Messiah. There is no discussion of the Messiah
in the context; he has not been mentioned since 9:5 and is not mentioned until 10:4. Paul is discussing Israels failure to achieve the goal
of the law. The stone image carries multiple meanings in the OT and
Judaismthe word of Yahweh, the law, the righteous community
(Qumran), the messiah (Targums), the Temple (Rabbis), the universe
(Rabbis). While 1 Peter 1:6 uses the stone image messianically, Paul
here is using it in its OT sense as the law. The in him phrase from
Romans 9:111:36
261
262
Romans 9:111:36
The object of knowledge, or the point of ignorance, is righteousness. The contrast is the righteousness of God (the language of 1:1617 and 3:21-26) and their own righteousness, the saving power of
God to make the world right versus the exclusive ethnic righteousness
of Israel. The subject is Israel as a people, not individual Jewish people. Their own (idios) contrasts ours with others. The Israelites
are seeking to establish their own national righteousness, which
excludes all other people. The word for establish (stsai) is normally
used in the OT for Gods establishment of the covenant. Israel here
seeks to do Gods business. The problem of this seeking is defined by
one further contrast, not submitting (lit., ordering or standing
under). The issue is voluntary subordination rather than seeking. Israel
as a people is ignorant because it seeks its own exclusive righteousness by refusing to submit to the righteousness of God.
Romans 9:111:36
263
264
Romans 9:111:36
a description of the righteous faithfulness of God (a subjective genitivelit., the righteousness of faithfulness), rather than human righteousness based on faith (an objective genitive). It is not the human
experience of righteousness by faith, which says that any person can
fulfill the righteousness of the law by faith, but the faithful and righteous God. The citation itself is divided into two sections by the but
what does it say at the beginning of v. 8. Verses 6 and 7 present the
negative, that which is not necessary. Verse 8 spells out the positive,
all that is necessary, which is explained in vv. 9ff. The point of vv. 6
and 7 is that human beings do not face a difficult task.
The opening citation from Deuteronomy 8:17 and 9:4, do not
say in your heart, recalls Gods salvation of Israel from Egypt and
warns against self-reliance and complacency in the Promised Land.
Gods covenant is a function of gracious election, not Israels righteousness. This opening line is followed by the picture of people exerting superhuman effort, looking high and low for Christ. Heaven and
abyss are symbols of the inaccessible. Because Christ is the fulfillment
of the law who offers life, people are pictured as looking everywhere
for him. But Christ has already come down from heaven, and been
raised from the dead. The interpretive center of the citation and commentary is the nearness of the word in v. 8. It explains why human
effort is of no value. Searching for Christ is unnecessary, Paul asserts,
because he is present. Christ is present in the near word, which is no
longer the law but the word of faith preached by Paul.
Paul reads the Deuteronomy text as a summons not to do the law
but to hear the true content of the word of God, which is now the
word about Christ. The text that originally proclaimed the nearness of
the law now proclaims the nearness of Christ. Israels pursuit of the
law by works (9:32) and her attempt to establish righteousness by
human effort (10:3) is futile because both the law and righteousness
are now present and fulfilled in Jesus and available by faith.
Paul reinterprets the Deuteronomy text to say that just as Moses
disclosed and made accessible the Torah of God, so Christ has made
accessible righteousness to all who exercise faith. What Israel could
not do through works or her own seeking God has done. Christ is
the goal of the law for righteousness to all who trust.
Pauls provocative reinterpretation is made even clearer in his
expansion of each key term of Deuteronomy 30:14 in vv. 8b-9:
Deuteronomy
The word is near you
Romans
the word of faith which we preach. If
you confess
Romans 9:111:36
in your mouth
265
266
Romans 9:111:36
Romans 9:111:36
267
basis of faith in vv. 9-13. Messiah Jesus is the fulfillment of the law to
everyone who trusts because the goal of the Torah is that all nations
become one before God. Out of faith removes all distinction and special privilege. God grants salvation to all who confess Jesus as Lord
and who call upon the name of God. Paul again affirms that the word
of God has not failed. It is fulfilled in Messiah Jesus.
268
Romans 9:111:36
Romans 9:111:36
269
sues the law incorrectly, she seeks to establish her own righteousness
to the exclusion of other peoples, she does not submit to Gods
righteousness, she has not accepted the Messiah as the fulfillment of
the law, she is rebellious against the will of God. Second, God is fulfilling a purpose in history. God has chosen to remake the people of
God by calling other people (9:14-29; 10:18-21). In ch. 9 the call
of God constitutes the true Israel. Here, the people calling on God
meet the requirement to become members of Gods people irrespective of their ethnicity.
The passage provides a unique insight into Pauls understanding of
his mission. His use of Isaiah in vv. 15 (Isa. 51:7) and 16 (Isa. 53:1)
suggests that he understands his mission as in continuity with Isaiahs.
The feet (plural rather than singular as in Isaiah) of those proclaiming
the good news are now Paul and his associates. The from us in v. 16
refers to Paul and his associates. The word of Christ in v. 17 is Pauls
preaching of the gospel of Messiah Jesus. Paul sees himself as a
co-worker with Isaiah in preaching the good news of Gods salvation
for Jews and Gentiles.
TEXT IN BIBLICAL CONTEXT
Two quotes from the OT are central in interpreting this text, Leviticus
18:5 in 10:5 and Deuteronomy 30:11-14 in 10:6-8. Interpreters usually contrast these two texts: Leviticus describes righteousness by
works of the law and Deuteronomy describes righteousness by faith.
Galatians 3:12, where Paul also cites Leviticus 18:5, is used to sharpen the contrast even more. The one who does the law is justified, but
no one can fulfill the law, because its demands are beyond fulfillment.
In other words, Paul, it is claimed, uses the Leviticus text to summarize the principle of salvation through works of the law in order to
demonstrate through the Deuteronomy text that what the law says is
impossible and wrong.
Leviticus 18
Leviticus 18:5 comes from a context in which Yahwehs claims upon
Israel are being asserted in parallel form to Exodus 20:1-17 and
Deuteronomy 5:6-21. The preface in vv. 2b and 4b, I am the Lord
your God, and the conclusion in 5b, I am the Lord, are covenantal
in form and content. Israel is called to observe the law because
Yahweh is Israels God. Israel is asked to live out its covenant-faith
with Yahweh. For such faithfulness Israel will live. Leviticus 18:5 is
about faithful obedience to the redeeming and covenanting God, not
about flawless obedience as a means of salvation.
270
Romans 9:111:36
Leviticus 18:5 is used four times in the OT, Ezekiel 20:11, 13, 21
and Nehemiah 9:29. Ezekiel uses the text in a judgment speech to
characterize the law as the great gift of life and deliverance, which set
Israels life on a new foundation. Israel is condemned for not following the good will of God. In Nehemiah 9:29 the Leviticus text is cited
in a prayer, which describes Israels covenant relationship with God
and the promise of life which God gives.
The Leviticus text is cited with some frequency in Jewish literature,
and always to make a positive statement about God and the law. One
theme stresses the life giving quality of the law. For example, the law
can be set aside during times of persecution or war to preserve life.
Thus, the Sabbath law is set aside during the Maccabean wars. A second theme teaches that even Gentiles can study and obey the Torah,
and therefore share its promises. A third theme emphasizes how easy
it is to obey the law.
Leviticus 18:5 is not used in the OT or Jewish literature to teach
perfect obedience to the law or salvation by means of doing the law.
Rather it is used to call Israel to faithfulness to its covenant relationship to Yahweh and to affirm the promise of life which follows such
obedience. Pauls use of Leviticus 18:5 in Galatians 3:12 cannot be
used to determine its interpretation here. The context is very different. We know that Paul can use the same citation for different purposes in different settings, as his use of Psalm 142:2 in Galatians 2:16
and Romans 3:20 demonstrates. But even more significant, Paul
alters the text of Leviticus 18:5 so much that he clearly does not
intend to use it in the same way as in Galatians. Different words, let
alone the same words, in different context mean different things.
Furthermore, the traditional interpretation does not fit the Romans
context where Paul has been arguing that righteousness by works is
precisely Israels problem. To suddenly affirm what Paul has been
denying makes nonsense of the theology Paul has been developing
from 9:30ff.
Deuteronomy 30
The Deuteronomy 30 text comes from a similar context. Chapters
2930 describe the renewal of the covenant. Yahweh has acted to
redeem Israel, and promises to circumcise her heart (30:6).
Deuteronomy 30:11-14 emphasize that the word of Yahweh is ultimate and all-sufficing. It requires no human effort because Yahweh
has done all, even placing it on Israels lips and in her heart. The command of Yahweh is easy to obey.
Deuteronomy 30:11-14 was subject to considerable reflection in
Romans 9:111:36
271
272
Romans 9:111:36
Romans 9:111:36
273
law in faith establishes the law in 3:31 and leads to the goal of the
race in 9:31. All link righteousness, faith, and law positively and constructively with Christ. Christ, the fulfillment of the law, brings the
word of God to its goal. That is good news for Israel and for the world.
Obedient Hearing
The evidence of faith is obedient hearing. The response to preaching must be more than faith. It must be faith that expresses itself in
obedience. Israel, Paul claims, heard but did not obey. What does it
mean for the new people of God, the church of Jews and Gentiles, to
obediently hear the Word of God in postmodern times? Might Paul
be critical of the church today for its much talk, but highly selective
obedience? Would he see the church as a disobedient and contrary
people?
PREVIEW
Chapter 11 is the climax of Pauls argument in chs. 911. The rhetorical question in v. 1 states the central problem he has been addressing, has God rejected his people? Verses 1-10 summarize important
elements of what he has been saying and set the stage for the final
argument. Paul reaffirms the faithfulness of God by reusing important
terms from earlier in the letter, e.g., remnant, by grace and not works,
the rest are rejected by God. Verses 11-32 make the case for the
future salvation of Israel and the importance of this salvation for the
world. The mercy of God in saving Israel and the world in faithfulness
274
Romans 9:111:36
Doxology, 11:33-36
Romans 9:111:36
275
EXPLANATORY NOTES
276
Romans 9:111:36
In vv. 5-6 Paul offers a significant interpretation of remnant theology. He uses three connectivesthus, therefore, alsoto explain
that a remnant remains to the present (Paul is making an important
point because nowhere else does he use three connectives in succession). The present remnant obviously refers to Paul and the Jewish
Christians. But more than that, this is a remnant chosen according to
grace. For the first time since 6:15 Paul reintroduces the word grace;
it is clearly a very critical term in his argument, because he uses it four
times in two verses. Election, the key term in Israels self understanding, and grace, a key term in Pauls theology of salvation and peoplehood, are linked for the first time in Romans. Grace and works are
contrasted for the first time in Romans. The elect remnant exists only
by an act of Gods free and unconditional choice. God did not elect
Israel or the remnant because of who they were or what they did.
Specifically, grace excludes works, the definition of election that
marks Jewish identity. Paul is summarizing his entire argument in
these versessalvation, whether called righteousness or election, is by
Gods grace (3:24-6:15). That is why salvation cannot be restricted to
Israel (3:20, 27-28; 9:32).
Pauls theology of the remnant raises the question of the remainder of Israel, the rest, which he addresses in vv. 7-10. The question
is brief, what then? The first phrase of Pauls answer recalls 9:31,
Israel did not find what it sought. In contrast, the elect attained it, an
echo of 9:30. The elect are a group within Israel, namely, the Jewish
Christians. What they attained is not stated explicitly, although the
larger context suggests inclusion in the end-time people God is creating. The rest (hoi loipoi), that is, the majority of the Jews were hardened (lit., petrified). Paul explains what he hinted at in 9:22, 23, 33;
Israels failure is by divine design. Israel apart from the remnant
became dead-like. Pauls thesis is provocative, and requires biblical
support, which he offers with two citations.
The first Scripture is from Deuteronomy 29:4 with an introductory phrase from Isaiah 29:10 (spirit of stupor). Israel is blind once
again by divine action. Now, as in the past, the elect people are prevented by God from seeing the nature and direction of Gods purposes. The catchword for the second citation from Psalm 69:22-23 is
unseeing eyes. The Psalm was originally a prayer for judgment on
Davids enemies. As in 3:10-18, Paul turns Davids petition against
his own people. Israel is now in the position David sought for his enemies, trapped in a snare, blind, backs bent in slavery. As God hardened Pharaoh in ch. 9, so now God hardens Israel. The great majority of Jewish people are under the judgment of God. The law, the
Romans 9:111:36
277
prophets, and the writings, the entire Jewish Scriptures bear witness
to this judgment. But the judgment has very important limits. Paul
breaks off the citation just before the Psalmist says let them be blotted out of the book of the living. The hardening of the Jews did not
lead to their destruction.
World/Gentiles
riches for the world
riches for the Gentiles
how much more will their fullness mean?
278
Romans 9:111:36
Romans 9:111:36
279
response of the Jews and the Gentiles has been reversed, but the central place of Israel in this salvation has not been displaced. The endtime salvation of Israel will mean eschatological life for all people.
While Israel as a people is now hardened, there is still a future which
will mean salvation for her and the world.
Pauls second argument reframes an important theme that he has
been developing since ch. 5. Israel is the means of the worlds salvation by being the place where Sin is focused, gathered, and concentrated. The election of Israel means that she carries the burden of Sin
for a season to bring salvation to all people. Here the form of that
argument is that Israels unbelief, or fall, or hardening, is one phase in
Gods plan. This phase is temporary; it does not mean that Israel is
excluded from salvation forever. Her present hardness serves the
purpose of salvation for the Gentiles. The grandeur of that salvation
cannot be compared with the much greater grandeur of what God
will do for humanity and the world when Israel will be saved. The
obverse side of that argument, of course, means that the salvation of
the Gentiles now also is but one part of Gods plan, namely, the salvation of the nations through Israel. The Gentiles are not a new and
independent people of God; they are being incorporated into Gods
people Israel.
Paul breaks into the argument with an exhortation directed to the
Gentile Christians in Rome. The address is very directyou in vv. 17,
18, 20, 21, 22, 24. The problem is the presumptuous boasting of the
Gentile Christians. The earlier ethnic righteousness of the Jews,
which Paul rebuked, has now been turned on its head. The Gentile
believers are looking down on the Jews in their hardened state, and
saying that God has turned away from them once and for all. The
Gentile Christians have displaced the Jews; the salvation of the
Gentiles is now the crowning work of God. The problem created by
Gentile boasting is just as serious as Jewish boasting in ethnic righteousness. In both cases one group within Gods inclusive people is
saying we are the elect, the saved, and what we have you cannot have.
Paul addresses Gentile boasting by extending the root-plant
metaphor from v. 16 to a specific plant, the olive tree. The metaphor
has historic roots; Israel is an olive tree (Jer. 11:16; Hos. 14:6). The
issue here is the relationship of different branches to the tree itself.
The root is clearly Jews and Jewish Christians, the cut branches the
Jews who rejected the gospel of Messiah Jesus, and the wild branches the Gentiles who have accepted the gospel. Olive trees were the
most widely cultivated fruit trees in the Mediterranean. Farmers
280
Romans 9:111:36
renewed old olive trees by grafting in wild olive branches. Paul is using
a metaphor that would be familiar to his readers. The purpose of the
grafting here is to make the wild olive branches partners (lit., fellow
sharers) in the rich root of the olive tree (v. 17). The point of the
metaphor is not the cutting down of the tree and replacing it; that is
precisely what Paul rejects. The point is cutting off branches and grafting in new ones to make it more fruitful. The tree remains, and
receives new life through new branches.
The purpose of the metaphor is to admonish Gentile Christians.
Two commands center the admonition: do not keep on boasting
over the branches (v. 18), and do not think thoughts of pride, but
of fear (v. 20). The first imperative uses the same word for boasting
that Paul used to indict the Jews in ch. 2. Boasting denies dependence
on God by making a claim, by insisting on a right to privilege. The second admonition refers to the presumption identified in v. 19, God has
cut off Israel and replaced her with the Gentiles. Only the fear of God,
the beginning of wisdom in Jewish piety (e.g., Ps. 2:11; Prov. 1:7;
3:7; Sir. 1:11-14), can keep faith from turning into arrogance.
The admonitions are supported by three arguments. First, the
Gentiles depend on the Jewish roots (v. 18b). God has not turned the
tree upside down so that the Gentile branches now support the root.
A Gentile church without Jewish roots is not the church of God.
Gentile Christians remain dependent on the rich Jewish root that goes
back to Abraham. That is true, Paul argues in diatribe fashion with an
objector, even though God did judge the branches for unfaithfulness
(also used in 3:3 of Israel). Israels judgment for unfaithfulness is a
reminder that the Gentiles are now in only because of faith, not
because of rights.
Second, Gentiles who fall into the same error as the unfaithful
Jews will share the same fate (vv. 19-22). If the promises of God to
Israel did not spare the Jews from being cut off, then Gentile
Christians should not assume they are exempt from the same judgment. Any believers, Jew or Gentile, can be cut off by becoming
unfaithful, that is, by becoming presumptuous or arrogant about
Gods grace. God is by definition severe (apotmian theou) toward
those who fall; God cuts them off, but is good (chrstts theou)
toward those who remain in that goodness.
Third, Jews can more easily be reinstated into the tree (e.g., Gods
plan), than can Gentiles (vv. 23-24). The power of God, the same
power as in the power of the gospel (1:16) and the power which is
able to fulfill the promises to Abraham (4:21), can rejuvenate withered, cut off branches and graft them back into the tree. In fact, by
Romans 9:111:36
281
using the much more argument again, Paul says God can graft natural branches much more easily than wild branches. God, of course,
will do that only if the Jews respond in faith (lit., if they not remain
in unfaithfulness).
The point of Pauls admonition is clear. Presumption, whether
Jewish or Gentile, is fatal. Paul has turned the tables. Earlier the problem was Jewish and Jewish Christian presumption, now it is Gentile
Christian. Inclusion in Gods salvation and peoplehood depends
entirely on continuous faithfulness, on trust in the grace and goodness
of God. Presumption is unfaith; it replaces dependence on the grace
of God with claims on God. Undergirding these admonitions is an
affirmation of the priority of the Jews. They are the root and their
identity is inviolate. God has not replaced the Jewish tree with a
Gentile Christian one. Gentile Christians are dependent on the Jewish
root. The Jewish root receives new life through the Gentile Christian
graft, but is not dependent on the graft. As Paul said in the thesis
statement of the letter, the gospel is the power of God to salvation
. . . to the Jew first and also to the Gentile (1:16). There is a Jewish
priorityboth temporal and theologicalin the gospel. Verses 25-32
explain why.
282
Romans 9:111:36
tion. The use of the same word suggests an equivalency of Jewish and
Gentile end-time salvation; there will be a fullness of both peoples.
Gentiles is a collective term; not every Gentile is meant. Come in
denotes entrance into a community of people, here clearly into Israel.
It is the equivalent to being grafted in in vv. 17, 19, 24. The Gentiles
are now being incorporated into Israel. The shift from exclusion to
inclusion of the Gentiles began in 9:22, and was developed in
9:3010:13. Paul does not say that Israel must become part of the
church, but that the Gentiles will be brought into Israel. He may well
be alluding to the OT and Jewish vision of the eschatological pilgrimage of the Gentiles to Jerusalem. The sobering warning for Gentiles
is that the time for their salvation is limited, their opportunity for inclusion will come to an end just as the time of Israels hardening will be
terminated. That will be the time for Israels salvation.
Third, and so all Israel will be saved. All Israel means Israel as a
corporate people, not every Israelite. All Israel stands in contrast to
the remnant in v. 5, some in v. 17, and from a part in v. 25. When
the full number of the Gentiles are converted, all Israel will be saved.
The difference between fullness of the Gentiles and all Israel is significant. Not all Gentiles but a fullness, an unknown number of
Gentiles, contrasts with all Israel, Israel as a people.
The three elements of the mystery are interdependent. Paul links
the salvation of the Gentiles with the salvation of the Jews. The
restoration of Israel is a consequence of the salvation of the Gentiles,
and the salvation of Israel is necessary for the salvation of the Gentiles.
The Gentiles first and then the Jews for Paul represents universality,
the fulfillment of Gods plan to reconcile Jew and Gentile into a single Israel.
Scripture validates the mystery and indicates the manner of its fulfillment (lit., in this manner). The quotation combines lines from
Isaiah 27:9 and 59:20-21:
The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob (Isa. 59:20)
and this will be my covenant with them (Isa. 59:21a),
when I take away their sins (Isa. 27:9).
The Redeemer will come from Zion (ek), rather than for the sake
of Zion (eneken, LXX). The Redeemer in the context of chs. 9-11 is
Messiah Jesus rather than Yahweh as in Isaiah. The Redeemer will do
two things. First, he will reverse the ungodliness (asebeia) of 1:18
(the ungodliness and unrighteousness of people) and demonstrate the
reality of 4:5 (God makes righteous the ungodly) by taking it away.
Romans 9:111:36
283
The ungodliness that originally caused the breach between God and
Israel, and thus the judgment of God, will be removed. Secondly, God
will renew the covenant with Israel and express it by take away their
sins. Israels hope for the renewal of the covenant and the forgiveness
of sins will be fulfilled (Isa. 4:4; Jer. 31:33; Jub. 22:14-15; Pss. Sol.
18:5). Israels eschatological salvation will be the fulfillment of her historic faith and covenant, not her conversion to another religion.
Pauls language is clear and deliberate. He uses covenant in
Romans only in association with Israel; it is Gods covenant with the
Jewish people. Forgiveness of sins is not normal Pauline language;
he speaks rather of victory over the power of Sin. But here Paul is
talking about the salvation of Israel in fulfillment of Gods promises,
which means renewing the covenant and forgiving Israels disobedience of the terms of the covenant. But the sequence is also important.
Renewal and forgiveness do not happen, contrary to most first-century Jewish expectation, in nationalist terms or against the Gentiles, but
with and following the salvation of the Gentiles. The progression is
from the Jews to all peoples, not to the Jews. Gods plan of salvation
has always been inclusive and universal, just as Scripture promised.
Pauls explanation of the mystery of Gods salvation is structured
with a series of contrasts. The languageelection, call, mercyand
the contrasts offer a summary of Pauls argument in chs. 911, and
of the entire letter so far.
With respect to the gospel
with respect to election
Just as you
once were disobedient
to God
but now have received mercy by
their disobedience
so also
they have now been
disobedient for your
mercy
in order that
they also now they might receive
mercy.
284
Romans 9:111:36
Doxology 11:33-36
We have noted earlier that Paul concludes major arguments with a
doxology. He has been making the case for Gods inclusive and universal salvation. Verse 32 is his final formulation of the central thesis
Romans 9:111:36
285
286
Romans 9:111:36
Romans 9:111:36
287
religion that will become the universal religion of all people. What is
clear in the literature outlining such expectations is that the salvation
of the Gentiles is a by-product of the restoration and salvation of the
Jews, and will come to the Gentiles only with their conversion to the
Jewish religion. The salvation of the Gentiles is linked to their becoming Jews.
288
Romans 9:111:36
the Jews and that the church is the new Israel which has replaced
(superseded) ethnic Israel. Already in the second century Justin Martyr
argued that the church is Rachel, the loved wife, who has displaced
Leah, the first wife, and is the sole inheritor of the name and possessions of Israel. Cyprian in the third century A.D. taught that the
Gentiles instead of the Jews would attain the kingdom of heaven.
John Calvin, and most of his theological descendants, argue that all
Israel in Romans 11:26 means the church. In a variety of different
ways theologians since the second century have argued that the
church is the New Israel that has replaced historic Israel as the people
of God because Israel rejected Gods Messiah, and, in fact, crucified
him.
A teaching could hardly be further from Pauls intent than supersessionism. The target of Pauls exhortations in ch. 11 is precisely
Gentiles who hold an early version of that view. He is talking about
the Jewish people to Gentiles who boast that God has set Israel aside
(11:17-24). His opening line in Romans 11 is that God has not rejected Israel (11:1). The rejection of Israel is only temporary (11:25), and
even in this interim time Israel is a means of riches for the world
(11:12). The gifts and call of God are irrevocable (11:29). The church
depends on Israel for its life and mission; Israel is the root that sustains
the church, not vice versa (11:18). Chapter 11 says nothing about a
curse on the Jews because of their rejection of Christ, nor does the
rest of the NT. Chapter 9:3010:21 speaks of stumbling by Israel, but
11:11 explicitly asserts that this stumbling does not mean a fatal fall.
The harsh statement in 1 Thessalonians 2:15 is aimed at Jews who
are persecuting the church, not at the Jewish people as a whole.
Supersessionism is a theology that strikes right at the heart of Pauls
gospel, to the Jew first and also to the Gentile. Without the Jews
there is no Christian church.
Romans 9:111:36
289
essentially clings to a system of ethnic religion, one for Jews and a different one for Gentiles. It teaches precisely what Paul argues against
in Romans, that Christian faith and the church is exclusively for one
people, Jews or Gentiles. Second, Paul has argued throughout
Romans that the Jewish doctrine of one God means that this one God
saves all people on the same basis in fulfillment of the promises to the
patriarchs and the covenants. Two covenant theology challenges
Jewish and Pauline monotheism. Third, the gospel, Paul also argues,
is the good news that God has now offered righteousness, end-time
salvation through one person, Messiah Jesus, who fulfills the promises of God and the mission of Israel to bring salvation to all people and
the cosmos. When the deliverer of 11:26 is said to turn away godlessness from unbelieving Israel and forgive their sins, the most obvious meaning is that sin is their unbelief and that Israel will come to
believe in the Messiah.
Finally, throughout Romans and especially in chapter 11, Paul
makes the case that God is creating one end-time people in the world,
not two. In 11:11-14 he outlines his expectation that all Israel will
become incorporated into the community of faith. The analogy of the
olive tree (vv. 17-24) indicates that the broken off branches will be
grafted back. Paradoxically, in this one people the Jews have a priority based on the promises of God. That priority means that both people will be redeemed on the same basis, that both people need each
other to experience the real grandeur of Gods salvation, and that the
Gentiles will join the Jews, not the reverse, in the renewal and unification of the eschatological people of God.
Pauls burden in Romans is that one God is creating one people
through one person. Any theology that breaks apart this unity,
whether to raise one group above the other (supersessionism) or to
distinguish the one people from the other (two covenant theology),
misunderstands the central passion of Paul.
290
Romans 9:111:36
trusted to keep faith with any other peoples? The churchs place within Gods covenant is secure only if the Jewish people remain part of
the covenant. The Jews are the trunk, the Gentiles the branches.
Without the God of Israel and the Jewish people, there is no Messiah
and no Christian church.
The Jewish faith is not simply one more religion among the other
religious traditions (e.g., Hinduism or Buddhism). The Jewish people
are half brothers/sisters of Christian peoplethey come from the
same parents chosen to be the people of God in the world. They continue to be Gods people despite their refusal to believe that Jesus is
the Messiah. Gods grace toward Israel persists despite the fact that it
rejects this grace for the present time. The Christian mission to the
Jewish people, which continues the mission of Peter and Paul, is to
call this people to the fulfillment of its faith in Messiah Jesus, not to
the conversion to a different God and a different faith.
Romans 9:111:36
291
292
Romans 9:111:36
Israel as the elect people is not negated by including the Gentiles, but
is rather affirmed by it. The God who makes righteous the ungodly,
both Jewish and Gentile, is the God who may be trusted to keep the
promises to Israel.
The Abraham references in chs. 4 and 911 (9:5, 7; 11:1, 28)
underline the overarching unity of Pauls argument. The case for the
thesis of the second major argument of the letter, the revelation of the
righteousness of God to all people in 3:21-26, is framed by discussions of Abraham, ch. 4 and 9:5, 7 and 11:28. In ch. 4 Abraham is
the father of Gentile Christians as people of faith. In ch. 9 Abraham
is the father of the children of promise. In ch. 11 Abraham is the
ground for the election of unbelieving Jews. Abraham demonstrates
the legitimacy of Gentile inclusion in the people of God in ch. 4 and
of Gods ongoing election of Israel in chs. 911. Abraham is the basis
for arguing both the centrality of faith in Messiah Jesus and the
integrity of Gods covenant faithfulness. Abraham is the father of all
the people of God. Therefore, he is the basis for exhorting Jewish
Christians in ch. 4 to accept Gentile Christians who trust God in
Christ apart from works of law. In ch. 11 he is the basis for rejecting
Gentile Christian arrogance toward the Jews and for exhorting their
humble recognition of the ongoing priority of Israel in Gods plan.
Chapters 911 are a single sustained argument that explains both
Jewish unbelief and Gentile faith. The question that elicits Pauls argument is not only, has Gods faithfulness to Israel been nullified by
Jewish unbelief, but also, has God ceased to be impartial by calling
primarily Gentiles to faith in the present time? Divine faithfulness and
impartiality are in dynamic tension in all three stages of the argument.
The first argument, 9:6-29, demonstrates how God elects both Israel
and the Gentiles on the same basis, mercy without regard for human
behavior or worthiness. The second argument, 9:3010:21, shows
that Christ is the goal for both Jew and Gentile, and that the impartial proclamation of the gospel functions to harden Israel so that the
Gentiles can be reached. The third argument, 11:1-32, indicates that
Israels hardening is temporary, destined to be removed by the fullness
of Gentile faith. The mystery revealed in 11:25-27 makes explicit
what has implicitly driven the argument since 9:6the interrelatedness of Jew and Gentile in salvation history. Gods back-and-forth
dealings with Israel and the nations are the concrete manifestation of
Pauls dual claim that God is both faithful and impartial.
Chapter 11 is a key to this larger argument. It makes the case that
Jews can (vv. 1c-6) and will be saved (vv. 11-32) even though a temporary hardening prevents most from responding positively in the
Romans 9:111:36
293
present time (vv. 7-10, 26). In fact, it is in the interests of the Gentiles
that the Jews be saved, because the grandeur of Gods salvation will
be geometrically increased. Verses 28-32 make clear that Gods word
has not failed. Gods plan is the temporary casting away of Israel for
the sake of saving the world. Thus, God is both righteous and impartial to all people. While this theology was developed earlier to critique
Jewish arrogance, in ch. 11 it is aimed at Gentile arrogance. Paul
makes it clear that Gentile Christians have not replaced Israel as the
true people of God, but depend upon Israel and her salvation. That is
a very important point because two issues are at stake: first monotheism, one God of Jews and Gentiles, and secondly ecclesiology, one
church composed of Jews and Gentiles.
The whole argument is about the covenant faithfulness of God. Paul
interprets and reinterprets the covenant history of Israelfrom
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to Moses and the Exodus in ch. 9 to
Deuteronomy 30 in ch. 10, to the covenant renewal prophecies of
Isaiah and Jeremiah in ch. 11to make the case for the righteousness
and faithfulness of God in salvation history. God has been narrowing
Israel down, choosing this son and not that one, choosing some of the
wilderness generation and not others, making Israel the vessel of wrath
to demonstrate Gods riches to the vessels of mercy, hardening Israel to
save the world. Israels vocation is to be the people of God for the salvation of the world. That is the theme Paul drives so hard in ch. 11 as
the climax of the history: through their trespass salvation has come to
the Gentiles (v. 11); their trespass means the riches for the world,
and their failure riches for the Gentiles (v. 12); their rejection means
the reconciliation of the world (v. 15); you . . . now have received
mercy because of their disobedience (v. 30); they have now been disobedient in order that . . . you may receive mercy . . . (v. 31).
Gods plan for Israel was to make her the people for saving the
world. While that vocation was distorted by Israels presumption that
election meant national status and privilege, her role has been
restored in Messiah Jesus. God brings salvation by triumphing over
Sin in Messiah Jesus. To do that Sin needed to be focused and concentrated, literally piled up, in one place. Part of Israels salvation history vocation was to be that place, to be hardened for the world, to
become the vessels of wrath, in order that God could deal with Sin in
one place, in one people, and ultimately in one person, the Messiah.
God in Messiah Jesus has triumphed over Sin, 3:21-26 and 5:12-21,
in order to save the world. God has put forward the hilastrion
through faithfulness by means of his [Jesus] blood to demonstrate
that . . . he is righteous even making righteous. Christ fulfilled the
294
Romans 9:111:36
special role of Israel by fulfilling the law for the purpose of righteousness to all people of faith. Israels vocation of being the place where
Sin was gathered was never intended by God to be permanent, but
as a temporary means for the salvation of all people.
The Gentile mission fits precisely into this plan of God. It is the
positive result of Israels vocation of hardening and wrath, and in turn
is to be the means of calling Israel to the full salvation that God
intends. The privileges and blessings of those in Christ (chs. 5-8) were
those belonging to Israel. In Messiah Jesus they have been given to
Jewish and Gentile people of faith in order to make the nonbelieving
Jews jealous of their inheritance, and thus open to the new and final
end-time revelation of Gods righteousness.
Gods plan of salvation for the world means that Gentiles cannot
be arrogantthere is no church apart from Israeland that God will
keep the promise to save all Israel for the sake of the salvation of the
world.
Romans 12:115:13
296
Romans 12:115:13
Romans 12:115:13
297
PREVIEW
Paul lays the foundation for a series of exhortations to the Roman
Christians by moving backward, therefore, I exhort you . . . because
of what God has done, e.g., the mercies of God. God has done something. Therefore, Paul issues a principled exhortation and a series of
commands that follow. To be made righteous by God and to become
a member of Gods people requires resocialization; it affects the most
fundamental relationships, perceptions of reality, understandings of
the self. Earlier in Romans Paul has spoken about this transformation
as dying and rising with Christ (ch. 6), as living in the Spirit (ch. 8), or
as adoption into the family of God (ch. 8). The metaphors speak of a
radical break with the past and the beginning of a new way of life. The
radical nature of the resocialization process for the Roman Christians
is restated with a new set of metaphorssacrifice to God, nonconformity to this world, transformation (literally, metamorphosis) of
the mind. What these metaphors require is detailed in chs. 1215.
OUTLINE
The Exhortation Formula, 12:1a
The Living Sacrifice, 12:1b-2
12:1c-d The First Command
The Command 12:1c
The Reason 12:1d
12:2
The Second Command
The Negative Command 12:2a
The Positive Command 12:2b
The Purpose 12:2c
EXPLANATORY NOTES
298
Romans 12:115:13
Romans 12:115:13
299
300
Romans 12:115:13
12:1-2
the mercies of God
thankful sacrifice
offer the body
reasonable service
renewed mind
discern the will of God
Romans 12:115:13
301
Not only does Paul answer ch. 1 in the opening frame of ch. 12, he
also builds on what he said in chs. 6 and 8. The verb to present was
used five times in ch. 6 (vv. 13, 16 and 19 twice each time) and in
close connection with body (vv. 12-13). Christians are not to present
their members to sin as instruments of unrighteousness, but rather to
present themselves to God in ch. 6. In ch. 12 they are to present their
bodies a sacrifice to God. The first imperative of the letter, think of
yourselves as dead to sin and living to God (6:12) is picked up in
the idea of a living sacrifice to God. The slaves of God . . . to sanctification (or holiness) is similar to the offering to God that is holy.
Pauls emphasis on the mind in ch. 12 builds on chs. 7 and 8. The
mind agrees with the law in 7:23 but is frustrated by captivity of the
law of Sin. The mind of the flesh is hostile to God and results in
death, while the mind that is determined by the Spirit is capable of
pleasing God in ch. 8. The new identity of Christians is centered in
the presentation of the self to God and the transformation of the mind
in chs. 6, 7, 8 and 12.
The third striking feature of the opening frame is the emphasis on
the mind, on thinking. The transformed mind is critical to Christian
behavior. Paul says more about the mind in chs. 1215 than in any
other passage in his letters. He is concerned with the head, with the
intellect. Correct thinking is critical to right living. The church over the
centuries has been much more concerned with the heart than with the
head. It does not talk about converting or sharpening your brain for
Jesus sake, but that is what Paul says in the opening frame and in
the exposition of that headline in 12:3f. The church cannot reshape
its identity without a transformation of the mind of individuals and of
the collective body.
Finally, the opening frame is critical because it defines a new group
identity for the church. Christians are people with a new ritual.
Participation in ritual marks the incorporation of people into a group
and its identity. The central ritual of the church is not the sacrifice of
something to God, but the sacrificial giving of the self to God and the
community. Christians are people with a new worldview, a new way
of thinking that enables them to discern the will of God. Knowing and
doing Gods will was a very important goal in Judaism; the echo of
2:18 (knowing the will of God and instructing others) is hardly accidental. Christians are people who can do that because their minds
think the things of the Spirit (ch. 8).
302
Romans 12:115:13
PREVIEW
Paul has just identified the transformation of the mind as a critical
imperative for Christians. He now explains the meaning of such
renewed thinking. The text unit is clearly defined by a play on the
word think in vv. 3 and 16. Correct thinking is the frame or inclusio. It means: 1) that Christians are members of a body that simultaneously is characterized by great diversity and great unity (vv. 4-8),
and 2) that Christians are to love without hypocrisy (vv. 9-15).
OUTLINE
A The Framethink correctly, 12:3
B To live as the body of Christ, 12:4-8
B To love without hypocrisy, 12:9-15
A The Framethink correctly, 12:16
EXPLANATORY NOTES
Romans 12:115:13
303
The first creates conflict and destroys community, the second controls
ambition for the welfare of the community.
The concern for right thinking opposed to wrong thinking
picks up the language from elsewhere in the letterthe critique of
arrogant thinking in 11:20 and the rejection of conceited thinking
in 11:25, and introduces a phrase which will be repeated in 15:5, the
same thing thinking among one another.
The problem among Christians in Rome is ambitious thinking,
thinking arrogantly in v. 3 and proud things thinking in v. 16. The
antidote to this communal poison is to think reasonable thinking in
v. 3 and to associate with the lowly ones and not become wise
according to yourself in v. 16. Correct thinking in v. 3 is based on a
mean outside of the self, to each as God has measured a measure of
faith. The gift of God to each person, not personal ambition, is the
standard for self-assessment. The goal is defined in v. 16 as the same
thing thinking among one another. The means is more radical than
in v. 3; it is not keeping within the limits of what God has given, but
the total reversal of associating with the lowly ones. The antithesis
to the proud in v. 16 is the lowly, the people who lack honor and
instead are characterized by shame. People in the church can think
the same thing among one another only when the people of status
and power associate with the shamed, the people with no honor and
status. The unity of the community is threatened by arrogant thinking.
The renewal of the mind calls for subversive thinking and behavior,
choosing to give up power and status to become one with the lowly.
Paul can call for status reversal with integrity, because he practices
it in his own ministry. He does not preach with eloquent wisdom lest
the cross of Christ be emptied of its power (1 Cor. 1:17); he surrenders all his rights in the gospel for the welfare of his churches
(1 Cor. 9:15-18); he refuses to boast except in his weakness because
when I am weak, then I am strong (2 Cor. 12:10); he willingly suffers the loss of all privilege for the sake of gaining Christ (Phil. 3:411). Paul practices status reversal and calls Jesus followers to such a
value commitment and lifestyle because that is how Jesus lived. Jesus
surrendered status for the weak and the lowly (2 Cor. 8:9).
304
Romans 12:115:13
members with different functions. The second line centers the diversitythe many are one body in Christ, which is further defined as
members one of another. The third line exhorts the use of the different gifts given by God to each member. Seven gifts are identified.
Prophecy denotes the spiritually inspired but rational ability to discern
and declare Gods workings in the community and Gods will for the
church. The value of the gift is determined by its origin in faith and by
its capacity to strengthen faith (the measure of faith refers to the source
of the prophetic word, i.e., a word from God, and to the results of the
measurement). The gift of service provides acts of service to the community. The one who teaches passes on and interprets the teachings of
the faith. The one who exhorts nurtures the practice of the ethical
implications of the faith. The gift of charity from ones own resources
must be exercised with simplicity. The patron who provides financial
support for those in need must demonstrate earnest dedication. The gift
of mercy must be bathed in a cheerful spirit. Each gift is to be exercised
faithfully for the benefit of the whole community (see 1 Cor. 12 and
Eph. 4 for other gift lists with similar concerns for unity in diversity).
The point of the metaphor is that the sum is greater than the
parts; the Roman Christians must learn to see themselves as interdependent parts of a larger whole. All parts are important and needed
for the well-being of the whole. No part should think arrogantly about
its importance or role. Thinking too highly of oneself is inappropriate,
because each gift is defined by being members one of another. The
churches are composed of interdependent people.
Romans 12:115:13
305
C in spirit zealous
in the Lord serving
B in hope rejoicing
in tribulation bearing up
in prayer remaining constant
A to the needs of the saints partnering
the love of strangers pursuing (usually translated as
hospitality pursuing).
The translation is intentionally literal. It shows the heavy use of participles
and prepositions to tie the whole together. The point of the poem is very
clearbe active in loving in a variety of ways, e.g., shrinking from evil with
horror, persisting in good, honoring, standing with, being partners with
Christians in need, actively loving strangers. The unity of the church is built
as people exercise love to each other in the spirit and in the Lord; the C
at the center is clearly important as the ground to enable active loving.
The first A introduces a theme Paul will develop in the next text
unit, 12:1713:10, resist evil in all forms by pursuing the good and
loving. To love without hypocrisy involves moral judgment, distinguishing good from evil and then pursuing the good. The discernment
of the good here and in 12:1713:10 expands on the same theme
from 12:2. The transformed mind seeks the good. True love, like the
will of God, involves discriminating moral choices.
The second characterization of the life of love is given in vv. 1415. The construction changes abruptly from participles to imperativesbless, bless, do not curse. The meaning of the previous poem
is radicalized by means of two wordsbless and pursue. To bless in
biblical tradition means to call down Gods gracious power on someone, including prayers for leniency, or forgiveness, or salvation. The
term pursue (dikontes)can also mean persecutebless the
ones persecuting (you is not in the best manuscripts). The love of
strangers and blessing the one pursuing is a play on words (diko in
both phrases). Intentionally and actively loving strangers and blessing
the ones pursuing or persecuting believers are flip sides of the same
coin. Verse 14 may be a Pauline commentary on the words of Jesus
about loving the enemy and praying for the persecutor (Matt. 5:44) or
blessing the persecutor (Luke 6:28). The language and sentiment were
also common in the OT (Ps. 36:22; Prov. 3:33; 30:10) and Judaism
(Ecclus. 21:26-7; 33:12) so that Paul could be quoting a word of wisdom. To love means to ask God to bless even people who persecute;
it certainly excludes the opposite, cursing the oppressors. Love means
solidarity with people whether in joy or sorrow.
306
Romans 12:115:13
Romans 12:115:13
307
308
Romans 12:115:13
the man is in his right mind (Mark 5:15; Luke 8:35). Paul and other
early Christian leaders link thinking and a subversive political order.
Those with status are to seek out the lowly and lift them up, give them
honor. The welfare of the whole is more important than the individual. Such subversive behavior can occur only if peoples thinking or
worldview has been radically changed.
Common Mind
Pauls second concern for the thought life is even more radical. He
calls Christians to a common mind, the same thing thinking
among one another (v. 16a). It is one thing to call for a worldview
that reverses the basic patterns of thought and behavior in a given culture. It is quite another to ask that the Christians and the churches
agree on such a radically new way of thinking and acting. But that is
the meaning of the phrase to be of the same mind. Paul uses the
motif of one mind six times (Rom. 12:16; 15:5; Gal. 5:10; 2 Cor.
13:11; Phil. 2:2; 4:2). These exhortations all call for a unified mind,
especially among church leaders, when the church supports the weak
(Rom. 12:16; 15:5-6) and when the church is torn by conflict (2 Cor.
13:11; Gal. 5:10; Phil. 2:2; 4:2). Unity is tested most severely when
the church must deal with the weakness or shame of fellow-Christians
and when there are differences of opinion. Paul exhorts unity in the
church by calling people to discern a common direction, to agree
about basic ideas and strategies, to have unity of mind. The model for
developing such unity of thought is Jesus. It is possible only if people
act like Jesus did, giving up personal ideas, preferences, and positions
for the welfare of others and for the sake of the whole.
Pauls focus on the mind of individual Christians and the church is
ultimately a concern for community solidarity. Thinking soundly and
unity of mind are indispensable for the unity of the Christian community.
TEXT IN THE LIFE OF THE CHURCH
Romans 12:115:13
309
310
Romans 12:115:13
PREVIEW
Paul develops two themes introduced in vv. 9 and 14, hate evil and do
the good (v. 9) and reject revenge against opponents or enemies (v. 14).
A series of key words define the text unitrepay (12:17 and 13:7),
obligation or owe (13:7, 8), evil and good (12:17, 21; 13:3, 4, 8), love
(13:8, 10). The unit is tied together by the theme of obligation or repayment in relationship to evil and good. In a society where Christians are
persecuted by fellow Christians and non-Christians, should they practice
revenge? In a society where Christians are overtaxed and taxed unfairly, should they resist the taxing function of the state? Should Christians
repay evil with evil? Pauls answer to every question is no. Instead, he
argues, Christians should repay evil with good, pay taxes, and love the
neighbor. Paul makes his case with three commands.
The Pauline exhortations are principled and politically realistic at
the same time. Paul does believe that Christians should do good and
hate evil, that revenge should be left to God, that Christians should live
by love. But he also knows he is addressing a minority group in a hostile environment. Any kind of explicitly revolutionary or culturally subversive activity by these people would be political and social suicide.
To argue for non-retaliation, for payment of taxes, for life governed
by peace and love is good political realism for a new and small group
of Christians trying to live out the gospel in an alien context.
OUTLINE
The First ImperativeDo not repay (apodidmi) evil but overcome
evil, 12:17-21
A 12:17a Do not repay evil (kakon)
B 12:17a
For evil (kakou)
12:17b
Think the honorable before all people
12:18
Live peacefully with all people
12:19
Do not avenge yourselves
Scriptural confirmation 12:20
B 12:21a
Do not be overcome by evil (kakou)
A 12:21b but overcome evil (kakon) with the good.
Romans 12:115:13
311
312
Romans 12:115:13
maker. The qualification if you are capable (lit., if you have the power)
recognizes that peaceful living takes two sides. In a context of oppression and persecution it may not be possible, or it may not lie within
your power, to live peaceably. The verbal form (eirneuontes) requires
the supplying of a helping word in English, living, pursuing, building,
and so forth. Making peace a verb, not available in English, connotes
a dynamic element often missed in current discussions on peace.
The third counteraction is a quote from Proverbs 25:21-22. Do
not respond to hostility only with passivityleaving it to Godbut
with concrete acts of kindness. Such action Paul explains with the
strategic metaphor of burning coals upon his head, signifying that it
will confuse the opponent. It is not clear whether the metaphor connotes judgment in keeping with numerous OT precedents (Zerbe,
1992:182-84, 196-201), symbolizes contrition and repentance, as in
such a custom in ancient Egyptian penitence and reconciliation ritual
(Klassen, 1962:337-50), or fire-starting coals that are a friendship gift
(Isaak, 2003:37). But the exhortation to act kindly is clear.
Responding to evil with hospitality and kindness has a positive effectit unsettles the enemy. The final counteraction uses the imagery of a
Christian standing in the middle of a battle with the evil of the present
age. Do not respond to the power of evil by using the means of evil,
hostility or retaliation, but with the power of good.
The theological reason for the exhortation is given in the middle,
leave it to the wrath of God (v. 19), supported by a word of Scripture,
vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord (Deut. 32:35). The people of God are not to retaliate for evil done to them, because judgment
is Gods business. Retaliation against the enemies of Gods people was
both advocated and practiced by the Jewish Zealots in Pauls day. The
Zealot option may well have been a factor among Roman Jews and
Jewish Christians (see the introduction to the commentary The
Pastoral Context of the Churches in Rome). Paul, in agreement with a
series of Jewish teachers (T. Gad 6:7; 1QS 10:17-18; CD 9:2-5; 2 En.
50:4), rejects revenge against opponents whether outside or inside the
boundaries of Gods people, because such action must be left to God.
Romans 12:115:13
313
314
Romans 12:115:13
obedience. The command requires the moral choice to line up properly rather than to resist or oppose. While the every person may be
universal in scopeall peopleits reference here is to Pauls
Christian readers. The governing powers refer to the officers of the
government rather than to invisible angelic, even demonic, powers
who stand behind and empower the state government. The language
used is that of Hellenistic administration. In addition, the very specific
reference to government officials in v. 3 and vv. 6-7 defines the meaning as human beings who work in the government. Paul never tells his
readers to submit to angelic powers; in chapter 8 the Roman
Christians are told to resist and oppose the angelic powers who seek
to separate them from Christ (vv. 37-9; see also 1 Cor. 15:24-27;
Gal. 4:8-11; Col. 2:15).
Paul gives two reasons for his command, one theological (vv. 1b2) and the second practical (vv. 3-4). Each reason is given in two parts.
Romans 12:115:13
315
The critical word is ordered (tass). Paul does not talk about the
powers being ordained or appointed, that is, somehow specially
blessed by God, as in most translations. Rather, he talks about the
powers being ordered, or literally lined up like troops for battle, and
about peoples relationship to the powers as either properly
orderedlined up in proper orderor standing over againstintentionally lined up improperly. The role of the governing powers is
described as an ordering one, and the relationship of people to the
powers also is described as an ordering one.
The judgment for those who resist this ordering functionthat is,
stand over againstprobably refers to divine judgment rather than
the judgment of the governing powers. While the second theological
reason in vv. 3-4 is often interpreted to mean the judging role of the
powers, there are good reasons to think it means Gods judgment.
The word for judgment in v. 2 (krima) is usually used by Paul to
describe the judgment of God (10 out of 11 uses in the Pauline letters,
and all five of the other uses in Romans2:2, 3; 3:8; 5:16;
11:33refer to the divine). Furthermore, the language of judgment in
vv. 3-4 is not krima of v. 2, but wrath (org) which consistently refers
to the wrath of God. It seems Paul is saying that the consequence
of resisting the governing power is the end-time judgment of God.
316
Romans 12:115:13
13:6-7 Application
On account of this introduces the conclusion of the text unit and the
point toward which Paul has been driving. The phrase normally looks
both backwards and forwards. Paul has exhorted be subject to the governing powers to address a specific issue, the payment of taxes. That is
the backward perspective. The forward one is that the people collecting
taxes are ministers of God who constantly attend to this very thing.
The actual practice of the Roman Christians is that you are in fact paying taxes (the verb describes an ongoing activity rather than a command).
The reality for the Roman Christians is that they are paying taxes in order
to be subject to the governing powers and in recognition of the fact that
the governing powers are ministers of God in performing their task.
Many commentators suggest that the practice of paying taxes among
the early Christians was due to the teaching of Jesus found in Mark
12:13-17 and parallels (Pauls language is closest to Lukes account) the
practice of Jesus recorded in Matthew 17:24-27. While Paul does not
explicitly quote Jesus here, the similar teaching in 1 Peter 2:13-17;
1 Timothy 2:1-2 and Titus 3:1 could be a function of such teaching.
The final exhortation is an imperative: keep on giving to everyone what is owed, or more literally, continuously pay to everyone
the obligations. The phrase involves a conventional expression for
Romans 12:115:13
317
318
Romans 12:115:13
Romans 12:115:13
319
320
Romans 12:115:13
Non-retaliation
Paul is not introducing a new ethic when he commands non-retaliation against evil. Rather he is reaffirming a widespread teaching of
Scripture and Jewish exhortation. Non-retaliation is specifically taught
in Leviticus 19:18, Deuteronomy 32:35-36, and Proverbs 20:22, and
practiced in Exodus 23:4-5 and 2 Chronicles 28:8-15. Similar teachings are found in other Jewish literature (e.g., T. Gad 6:1-3; T. Jos.
18:2; T. Benj. 4:2-3; Jos. Asen. 23:9; 28:5, 10, 14; 29:3), and in
the sayings of Jesus (Matt. 5:38-48 // Luke 6:27-36). Joseph was the
Romans 12:115:13
321
322
Romans 12:115:13
me kings reign, and rulers decree what is just, by me rulers rule, and
nobles, all who govern rightlyor Daniel 2:21God deposes and sets
up kingsor Daniel 4:17the Most High is sovereign over the kingdom of mortals; he gives it to whom he will . . . (see also 4:25, 32;
5:21)or the Wisdom of Solomon 6:3-4For power is a gift to you
from the Lord, sovereignty is from the Most Highor Ecclesiasticus
(Sirach) 17:17over each nation he has set a governoror the
pseudepigraphic Letter of Aristeas 224God assigns glory and greatness of wealth to kings . . . no king is independent. All of them wish
to share this glory, but they cannotit is a gift of God (see also 219).
The exhortation to be subject to the governing authorities is both
similar to and different from three other texts in the New Testament.
First Peter 2:13-17 uses the same stand under term to exhort submission (v. 13). But the submission is less explicit than in Romansit is
to every human creation for the Lords sake whether the king as
supreme or to the governors as having been sent by him . . .
(vv. 13b-14a). There is no word about the divine ordering of the kings;
the governing authorities are ordered by the king, not God.
Furthermore, and very significantly, the entire exhortation is framed by
to every human creation (v. 13) and to all people (v. 17). Kings and
governors are subsets of all people. The purpose of the governing
authorities is similar to Romans, punishing evil doers and praising
those doing good (v. 14b). The primary motive for submission in both
Romans and 1 Peter is the will of God, but the secondary motives are
different: escaping fear and gaining praise in Romans (v. 3), disproving
false accusations against Christians in 1 Peter (v. 15). There is no reference to taxes in 1 Peter, no idea of the governing authorities as servants
of God, and no suggestion that resisting governing authorities equals
opposition to God. Both texts conclude by using fear and honor in the
same order, but the use is quite different. The reference in Romans is
general, to whom fear the fear, to whom honor the honor. In 1 Peter
God is the object of fear and the king the object of honor. But the honor
due the king is qualified by the chiasm in which it is placed:
Honor all people
Love the brotherhood
Fear God
Honor the king.
Honoring all people and honoring the king are parallel. Honoring the
king does not involve notions of divine status or authority (see further
on 1 Peter in Waltner:86-89).
Romans 12:115:13
323
324
Romans 12:115:13
Living Nonviolently
The Believers Church tradition is known for its pacifist teachings and
practices. But abusepower, gender, sexualis a major problem in
these churches, as in most churches. Passive-aggressive behavior is
common. Is that not a form of retaliation?
What does it mean to live peaceably in the family? In the Church?
What does it mean to reject revenge in the family? In the church? In
the culture?
Might it be that the peace churches give such priority to peace
teachings and conflict resolution seminars, because there is so much
unresolved conflict in these communities? Why is there such a fear of
candid discussion of the real issues in the church? They are discussed
in coffee shops. Can real and deep conflicts be resolved without open
conversation that facilitates understanding, growing trust, and finally
resolution?
Romans 12:115:13
325
326
Romans 12:115:13
er. Cornelia Lehns collection of over 50 such stories from the first century to the twentieth century, in Peace Be With You, illustrates the
breadth and power of such faithful witness. Second-century Roman soldier Servitor, having just become a Christian before he was sent off to the
army front, risked his life to cross the river and give food to the starving
enemy army of barbarians from the north. He was caught by a Roman
sentry and consequently sentenced to death by emperor Marcus Aurelius,
who mocked Servitors testimony, I obey my Master, Jesus Christ. He
is Lord of heaven and earth, and he has commanded us to love our enemies. That means feeding them when they are hungry (Lehn:20-21).
Or, Maximilianus testimony before the North African proconsul,
Dion, in his refusal to take up arms, I cannot serve as a soldier. I cannot do evil. His father, Fabius, a recruiter for the army, refused
Dions command to persuade his son to recant. Fabius became pale
and replied, No, even if I could change his mind, I would not. I am
proud of my son. Fabius walked the streets lamenting his sons imminent death and he had not long to wait. Maximilianus was executed
the next morning (Lehn:22-23).
Early Anabaptists witnessed to government leaders to call them to
the standards implicit in Romans 13:1-7. Hear what Menno Simons
says in several of his writings:
That the office of the magistrate is of God and His ordinance I freely
grant. But him who is a Christian and wants to be one and then does not
follow his Prince, Head, and Leader Christ, but covers and clothes his
unrighteousness, wickedness, pomp and pride, avarice, plunder, and
tyranny with the name of magistrate, I hate. For he who is a Christian
must follow the Spirit, Word, and example of Christ, no matter whether
he be emperor, king, or whatever he be. (in Wenger, 921-22)
Be pleased, in godly fear, to ponder what it is that God requires of your
Highnesses. It is that without any respect of persons you judge between a
man and his neighbor, protect the wronged from him who does him
wrong, even as the Lord declares, Execute judgment and justice, Assist,
against the violent, him that is robbed, Abuse not the stranger, the widow,
the orphan, Do violence to no man, and shed no innocent blood, so that
your despised servants and unhappy subjects, having escaped the mouth
of the lion, may in your domain and under your paternal care and gracious protection, serve the Lord in quietness and peace, and piously earn
their bread, as the Scripture requires. (Wenger:526)
Surrounded by a cloud of faithful witnesses, we today face the challenge of being faithful to Jesus Christ in owing no one anything but
love and being subject also to the authorities that rule the respective
countries where we Christians live.
Romans 12:115:13
327
PREVIEW
This text represents the apocalyptic counterpart to 12:1-2; it provides
the eschatological foundation for the exhortations just completed and
those to follow. The imminence of salvations completion is the
ground for renewing the mind and conduct of believers. In 12:1-2 the
renewal was characterized by nonconformity and transformation.
Here it is pictured in the more dramatic and concrete language of baptism into the Christian communityundressing and dressing, walking
in light rather than darkness. But the goal is similar, the renewal of the
mind, specifically not to give prior thought to the things of the flesh
to fulfill its desires (v. 14).
The text begins with the reason for renewed Christian moral conduct
and then gives three commands about the shape of such conduct. The
similar language and content in other Pauline texts (e.g., 1 Thess. 5:1-11;
Col. 3:1-11; Eph. 5:8-20) suggests Paul is drawing on a common formula which may have been part of the baptismal liturgy of the early church.
OUTLINE
The Reason, 13:11-12athe opportune time
The Imperatives, 13:12b-14let us . . .
13:12b Put off the works of darkness and put on the armour
of light
13:13 Walk properly as in the day
13:14 Put on the Lord Jesus
EXPLANATORY NOTES
328
Romans 12:115:13
Romans 12:115:13
329
Paul means enlistment in the army of a new commander and engagement in the battle against the evils of darkness.
330
Romans 12:115:13
Eschatology motivates new thinking and behavior. But the eschatological teaching itself is minimal. The present age is passing away.
The hour of salvation is very near, but still future. The kairos moment
in which Christians live requires critical thinking and living which is
informed by light rather than darkness.
THE TEXT IN BIBLICAL CONTEXT
The dark and light metaphor is common in Jewish and early Christian
teaching. In Jewish tradition, light comes from God but has been withdrawn from the earth and humanity because of sin. People, including
Jews, therefore wander in darkness. A future time is coming when the
darkness will end and the light be restored.
In between the times light and darkness are largely religious-ethical categories. Jewish people have access to the light in Gods revelation, the law. People can choose to walk in the light by obeying the
law. Jews must choose whether they want to be children of light or
children of darkness. In the Dead Sea Scrolls this theme is associated
with the coming eschatological battle. The children of light are exhorted to prepare for a battle against the children of darkness or Belial.
They prepare for it in the confidence that the forces of light will triumph and destroy darkness. The children of lightalso referred to as
the righteous, or the wise, or the enlightenedwill live in happiness
and glory.
The major themes of the Romans text are found throughout the
New Testament. Exhortations to wakefulness are common in the
Synoptic Gospels and are associated with expectation and preparedness (see Mark 13:34-36; Matt. 24:36-44; 25:1-13; Luke 12:35-40;
21:34-36). The night in these texts is associated with the present age.
Followers of Christ face numerous temptationsworldly cares, the
false glamour of wealth, all kinds of evil desiresand must keep
awake. Similar exhortations to wakefulness are found in the letters
(1 Thess. 5:1-11; Eph. 5:8-14; 6:10-20; Col. 4:2; 1 Pet. 5:8). The
call to wakefulness is consistently grounded eschatologically. The light
and darkness motif is a recurring theme (see esp. John 1:1-18; 12:46;
Matt. 4:16; Acts 26:18; 2 Cor. 4:6; 6:14; Eph. 5:18; Col. 1:12-14;
1 Pet. 2:9). The light in Judaism was embodied in the law while in the
early Christian writings it refers to Christ. A third theme running
through these texts is the importance of armour and the reality of warfare (see 1 Thess. 5:6-8; 1 Cor. 16:13; Eph. 6:10-20; 1 Pet. 5:8-11).
This reference to weapons and eschatological conflict is consonant
with parallel images in Paul, weapons of righteousness (Rom. 6:13;
2 Cor. 6:7), weapons of divine power (2 Cor. 10:3-4), the breastplate
Romans 12:115:13
331
of faith and love and the helmet of hope, the armour of God (Eph.
6:10-20; see also Yoder Neufeld, 2002:290-316). The linkage of
wakefulness and prayer found in the Gethsemane account (Mark
14:38 par., Luke 21:36) and in Ephesians (6:18) and Colossians (4:2)
is not present in Romans.
TEXT IN THE LIFE OF THE CHURCH
In Pauls letters the purpose of eschatological teaching about the end
of history is ethical exhortation. It is not speculation about the time of
the end. Paul displays no interest in calculating the time of the end. It
is simply near or imminent (see Geddert, 2001:324-25; Elias,
1995:211-13, for similar understandings).
Baptism as Enlistment
The association of eschatology with the cast off/put on imagery of
baptism is a reminder that baptism is more than the outward sign of
an inward reality. Baptism into the Christian community means
enlistment, signing up, for the battle of light against darkness,
morality against immorality, and righteousness/justice against injustice
(see Yoder Neufeld, 2002:316 for a similar understanding of baptism).
The church of Messiah Jesus would do well to redefine baptism as
enlistment in the army of God rather than as a rite of passage to
adulthood in the Christian community. It is a sign of coming of age
only to the extent that it says that one is old enough and responsible
enough to join the army, the army of Gods people to do battle with
darkness in light of the imminent approach of the end.
Call to Faithfulness
The prospect of the eschaton, the end, is a motivation to live faithfullyin
this text to live in the light rather than the dark, to live with public
integrity, to be armed for battle with the forces of evil and injustice.
To be awake, to put on Jesus Christ, to walk in the light means the
church is continually being nonconformed by the dominant values of
the prevailing culture and is being transformed by the renewal of its
thinking.
The imminence of the end calls the church to the practice of moral
discernment. What are the works of darkness in various cultures? The
growing HIV/AIDS epidemic suggests that Pauls concerns for sexual
promiscuity and drug abuse (drunkenness) are still profound manifestations of darkness. Jealousy seems not to have gone away in twenty
centuries. What other works of darkness does the church struggle with?
332
Romans 12:115:13
Welcome Differences
Romans 14:115:13
PREVIEW
Pauls concluding exhortations address very concrete and critical problems among the Roman house churches: differences, name calling,
and alienation over the specific Jewish practices of eating and observing special days. Both practices had become central to Jewish identity since the middle-second century B.C.; they were boundary markers
which defined Jewish particularity over against other people. The
observance of these customs became disruptive among believers in
the Roman churches. Paul exhorts tolerance and outlines the theological basis for it. Four commands structure the contents of the
exhortation.
The argument is clearly connected to earlier sections of Romans.
The structural parallel with ch. 2 is strikingexhortation against judging others (2:1-3; 14:3-4, 10) followed by the reminder that all must
face the judgment of God (2:16; 14:10-12). Three themes from the
introduction to the larger text unit, 12:1-2, are picked up again. The
way one thinks shapes action even when done in the Lord (14:6).
Because of that, Paul prays that God will grant the Christians a common mind (15:5). Doing what is pleasing to God translates into the
strong not pleasing themselves (15:1), but rather their neighbor (15:2)
just as Christ did not please himself (15:3). The theme of discerning
Gods will is picked up in 14:22the one who does not judge himself
on what he has discerned is blessed.
Romans 12:115:13
333
OUTLINE
First ImperativeContinually welcome the one weak in faith, 14:1-12
14:1
The Command
14:2-4
Example 1Eating
The problem, 14:2
The mutual obligations, 14:3
The critical question, 14:4
14:5a
Example 2Observing days
14:5b-9
The Critical Criteria
Personal conviction, 14:5b
Honor the Lord, 14:6
Live to the Lord, 14:7-8
Christ is Lord, 14:9
14:10-12 The Critical Questions
Second ImperativeDo not judge one another, 14:13-23
14:13b-15 First Commanddo not put a stumbling block in the
way of a brother
14:16-18 Second Commanddo not let the good be
blasphemed
14:19-23 Third Commandpursue peace and mutual
upbuilding
Third ImperativeThe strong ought to bear the weaknesses of the
weak, 15:1-6
15:1a
The Command
15:1b-2
The Explanation
15:3
The Model
15:4
The Scriptural Confirmation
15:5-6
The Prayer-Wish
Fourth ImperativeWelcome one another, 15:7-13
15:7a
The Command
15:7b-12
The Ground
The Christological Ground, 15:7b-9a
The Scriptural Ground, 15:9b-12
15:13
The Prayer-Wish
334
Romans 12:115:13
EXPLANATORY NOTES
Romans 12:115:13
335
336
Romans 12:115:13
Romans 12:115:13
337
338
Romans 12:115:13
uses the phrase the reign of God rarely (14 times compared with 105
uses in the Synoptic Gospels), but his use here is strategic. Just as
Jesus proclamation of the reign of God broke open the practice of
table fellowship, so the reign of God means the loving acceptance of
people in the churches who disagree about eating ritually clean or
unclean foods. The ethics of the kingdom eliminates the need to judge
people before God and each other.
Therefore, Paul asserts in his third explanation let us pursue
peace and the things that serve to build up one another, v. 19. The
strong are actively to work for the well being of the church as a whole
rather than pursue their own ideological interests. Building up
imagery is important for Paul (1 Cor. 8, 10, 14; 1 Thess. 5:11; Eph.
2:19-21; 4:12, 16, 29). It is a metaphor for encouraging mutual interdependence and harmonious relationships among Christians who find
it easy to shame each other, that is, to put each other down. Paul
explains precisely what he means with another imperative and another explanation. The command is do not destroy the work of God for
the sake of food (v. 20). The word destroy is the opposite of building up. The work of God refers to the churches. The first part of the
explanation repeats v. 14everything is clean, that is, ritually
pureand the second part repeats v. 15it is wrong to cause fellow
Christians to stumble theologically and spiritually by the food other
believers eat.
Paul amplifies the explanation with three principles for Christian
living. First, it is good to abstain from eating meat (ritually impure
food) and drinking wine (offered to the Roman gods before being sold)
occasionally (the verb is point action, in a specific instance) or anything else which causes a fellow Christian to stumble. Second, the
strong should keep their more expansive trust in Goda trust which
frees them from the beliefs and practices of more restrictive fellow
believersbetween themselves and God. Strong Christians should not
need to display their faith in public if it creates problems for weak
Christians. Christians who do not need to judge themselves for what
they discern as correct are blessed, Paul asserts. The third principle is
that everything that is not out of faith is sin, everything that does not
have its source in the faithfulness of Jesus is flawed by human enslavement to the power of Sin. That is why those who eat ritually impure
food when they doubt if it is permissible (lit., is of two minds) condemn themselves because they are not acting out of faith.
Pauls second exhortation is finely nuanced and balanced. Nothing
is ritually unclean by itself. Old lines for demarcating the holy and the
unholy, and thus those who are in from those who are out, no
Romans 12:115:13
339
longer apply. The more expansive believers can and should rejoice in
their theological and spiritual freedom. True faith means freedom, and
freedom involves diversity. But the exercise of freedom must be conditioned by love, by the effect the freedom has on believers whose
faith is less expansive and can be injured or even ruined by the public
display of freedom by others.
340
Romans 12:115:13
ing and death. The citation is significant for two reasons. First, the
believer laments his/her affliction by enemies and his/her own people
(see vv. 8, 28). Second, the citation uses honor-shame language; it
translates literally as the insults of the ones continually insulting
you fell on me. Christ models how to handle insults; he absorbs and
carries them on behalf of others.
Romans 12:115:13
341
Paul returns to the opening imperative, welcome, but now broadens it (v. 7a). In 14:1 the imperative was to welcome the weak person. Here it is to welcome one another. Paul broadens his exhortation
to include everyone. Christians are to practice mutual acceptance of
people with different theologies and values, specifically those who eat
different foods and observe different holy days.
Paul grounds his command in two things, the model of Jesus and
the teachings of the Scriptures (vv. 7b-12). Just as Christ accepted
you indicates the manner of Christs embrace of different people (in
14:3 Gods welcome was the ground for the exhortation). Christ, the
Jewish Messiah, lived and died for all people, Jews and Gentiles, for
the glory of God.
Paul elaborates the meaning of Jesus example by returning to the
major themes of the letter. Christ welcomed Jew and Gentile by
becoming a servant of the circumcised (the Jews). This is the only
place where Paul calls Christ a servant (diakonos = deacon), a servant for a people distinguished by circumcision (one of the three
boundary markers of the Jews).
Christ became a servant of the Jews for two reasons. The first is
in behalf of the truthfulness of God in order to demonstrate the
reliability of the promises to the fathers. The reference to the truthfulness of God returns to a description used in 3:4 and 7. There and
here it emphasizes the covenant faithfulness of God. Through Messiah
Jesus, God keeps faith with the promises made to the Jews. Second,
Christ became a servant of the circumcision in behalf of the Gentiles
in order that they might glorify God for his mercy. Paul again picks
up earlier themes in the letter. The Gentiles is used for the first time
since 11:25, and recalls the argument of chs. 24 and 911. It is used
six more times in the next four verses to emphasize the importance of
including the Gentiles in the people of God. Mercy recalls one of the
major motifs of chs. 911, while to glorify God reverses the indictment of humanity in 1:21 and recalls the previous closing statements
in 8:30 and 15:6. The linkage of the fulfillment of the promises to
Israel and the inclusion of the Gentiles recalls the discussion of
Abraham in ch. 4 as the heir of the world and the father of many
nations in fulfillment of Gods word.
Paul closes his final exhortation for mutual acceptance by summarizing the central argument he has been making in the letter. He reaffirms the priority of the Jews and the inclusion of the Gentiles in the
church through Messiah Jesus as the fulfillment of the promises of God.
Paul confirms his summary with a sequence of four scriptural citations from the law, the writings, and the prophets which are united in
342
Romans 12:115:13
their reference to the Gentiles. One word links all four quotations, the
nations (also Gentiles). Verse 9b is a verbatim quote from Psalm
18:49. David, the messianic prefigure, will praise God among the
nations. Verse 10 cites Deuteronomy 32:43, the last verse of the
song of Moses. The great founder of Israel exhorts the Gentiles to
praise God with Israel. Verse 11 quotes Psalm 117:1 to exhort the
Gentiles to praise God. The reason given in verse 2 of the Psalm is
the steadfast love (mercy in Greek) and faithfulness (truthfulness in
Greek) of God. Paul concludes the citations with a word from his
favorite writer, Isaiah 11:10. The root of Jesse was a title for the
Messiah in Judaism (Isa. 11:1-5; Ecclus. 47:22; 11QPat 3-4; 4QFlor
1:11), which Paul uses to present Jesus as the ruler of and the source
of hope for the Gentiles. The Messiah from the Jews is the hope of
all people, Jews and Gentiles.
Paul concludes the last argument and the main body of the letter
with a prayer centered in God and in hope: the God of hope . . . in
hope by means of the power of the Holy Spirit (v. 13). The wish is
that this God will fill believers with joy and peace and make them
abound in hope, all qualities that will help them fulfill the prayer-wish
of vv. 4-5 to think the same thing among one another.
Romans 15:7-13 has been called the climax of the letter, the conclusion of its theological and ethical argument. Just as 1:16-18
opened the main argument of the letter so 15:7-13 concludes it. The
gospel as the power of God for the salvation of Jews and Gentiles
results in a unified community of Jews and Gentiles who with one
mind and one voice glorify God. The problem of not honoring God
(1:21) or dishonoring God (2:23) is overcome by a unified people
honoring God. The christological grounding of this new community in
universal praise of God is made clear by the letters opening confession of the Davidic Messiah (1:2-4) and the closing reference to the
root of Jesse (15:12). Romans is framed by a christological confession about Jesus as the Jewish Messiah who brings salvation and hope
to Jews and Gentiles.
Romans 12:115:13
343
word initially was used to describe the servile classes. Over time it
came to mean people with no financial resources, that is, the poor,
and people who could not defend themselves because they have no
authority. It also was associated with the practice of foreign religion.
The weak are generally people without Roman citizenship. In short,
the language of Romans 1415 describes primarily status groups. The
strong had the power to force the weak into patterns of behavior
the weak would otherwise shun.
Read in light of this sociological understanding, Pauls exhortations
are very radical. The welcome one another means do not use the cultures standard honor categories to differentiate and shame fellow
Christians, but rather elevate people of low status by accepting them
as equals. The command against forcing the weak to consume food
considered forbidden means the strong are not to use their social
power to force the weak to follow the eating patterns of the
strong. The weak are prohibited from judging (14:4a, 10a), but
only the strong are exhorted to change their actual behavior (14:13,
19, 21; 15:1) because they alone have the power to do that.
Differences in status are usually maintained by different rituals.
Therefore, each group had distinct ritual practices, e.g., observed different days and thanked God for the opposite acts of eating and
abstaining. Such ritual differences are usually based on different theologies and values, here eating meat and drinking wine is central to
Christian life in the new age, versus such food is not acceptable in any
setting.
Different status groups with distinct rituals often define ethnic identities. The scorn of the strong (14:3, 10) fits Roman attitudes toward
foreigners. Roman citizens were ethnocentric; they resented the influx
of foreigners and looked down on their ethnic distinctives. Ethnic differences also are usually associated with different diets and eating
habits. Pauls use of clean/unclean language indicates a strong
Jewish ethnic component to the tensions over food.
Eating habits function as boundary markers. Food encodes social
and religious values. Differences in food easily lead to social conflict.
The problem in Rome is complicated by two factors. First, meat in
first-century Roman culture, as in many cultures today, is considered
food for special occasions and special people. Second, there are hints
of eating excesses among the strong (13:13; 14:2, 17, 21) which
would fit their higher economic status.
In a similar way, observance of days is a boundary marker. The calendar defines the value of time. Designating certain days as special or
holy gives a group a sense of order and distinguishes it from others.
344
Romans 12:115:13
Romans 12:115:13
345
Clean or Unclean?
Two different issues are involved in these textswhat one eats and
with whom one eats. Is the food clean or unclean (kosher food
and/or food not offered to idols), and are the people with whom one
eats clean or unclean? These are significant issues in the ancient world
generally, and especially in Judaism. The foods identified in Leviticus
11 as unclean cause defilement. That is, they disqualify people for
346
Romans 12:115:13
worship, and at a deep personal level they stain the inner conscience,
thereby creating barriers between the individual, the corporate community, and God. In short, the dietary laws mean you are what you
eat. Holy people eat only holy food.
Jesus (in Mark) and Pauls assertions that all foods are clean or
holy represent a break with Jewish theology, values, and practice on
this issue. Their affirmation of all foods as clean creates conflict for
people with more restrictive theological and moral sensitivities. Some
Christians are liberated, others are horrified and offended.
With whom one eats is equally important, because like eats with
like. Food is more than biological sustenance; it also is social language. It helps define ones relationship to other people. It defines who
belongs to a group and thus who is welcome. It defines group boundarieswhether Jewish Christian-Gentile Christian (Gal. 2; Rom.
1415), Christian-pagan (1 Cor. 810), or rich-poor (1 Cor. 11).
Paul consistently argues that: 1) all food is clean; 2) food does not
define group identity in the church; 3) the liberated and/or the
wealthy must exercise their freedom and affluence cautiously and lovingly in order not to offend the more restrictive or poorer and in order
to build the whole Christian community. The theological and social
meaning of food is redefined as inclusive rather than exclusive.
Everyone who confesses Jesus as Lord or who is in the Lord
belongs to the Christian community irrespective of what or with
whom he/she eats.
Romans 12:115:13
347
Boundary Maintenance
All branches of the Christian church, and especially those from the
radical or believers church tradition, have historical tendencies to be
boundary oriented. The mindset is either/or. One is either on this side
of the boundary and thus in, or on the other side of the boundary and
thus out. The boundaries are not drawn on matters essential to the
Christian faiththe oneness of God, the Lordship of Jesus Christ, the
presence of the Holy Spirit in the church and in individual Christians,
the saving power and effectiveness of Jesus life, death, and resurrectionbut on issues of ethical practice which help differentiate
Christian groups from the larger culture and from one another (the latter is often more important than the former, at least since the
Protestant Reformation). Numerous church divisions have taken place
on boundary issues, such as food, dress, hair covering, or mode of
baptism. Many people have been excluded from Christian communities because they eat the wrong food, associated with or married the
wrong people, participated in a forbidden activity, or wore inappropriate clothes.
348
Romans 12:115:13
be welcomed and lifted up by the powerful? That is what Paul advocated in the first century because of who God isrighteousand
because of what God has done through the faithfulness of Messiah
Jesusmade righteous. Can the church in very different times and
places model such practices for the same reasons?
Romans 12:115:13
349
Romans 15:1416:27
Conclusion
PREVIEW
Paul concludes the letter by returning to his mission to the Gentiles,
to his travel plans, and to his concerns for the obedience of faith
among the Roman Christians. The themes of the introduction and the
conclusion are similar (see The Framing of the Introduction and
Conclusion for the details). Romans is bracketed by an apostolic presence (parousia), as there outlined on pp. 45-46. The letter ends the
way it began, by Paul talking about his apostolic presence and mission.
OUTLINE
Pauls Mission,
15:14
15:15a
15:15b-17
15:18-20
15:21
15:14-21
Pauls Confidence
Pauls Letter
Pauls Ministry
Pauls Strategy
Scriptural Confirmation
350
Romans
351
352
Romans 15:1416:27
Romans 15:1416:27
353
354
Romans 15:1416:27
Spain and he wants to enjoy and be renewed (lit., filled up personally) by the company of the Roman Christians. The word used for help
for the journey is almost a technical term for the provisions local
churches made to support missionariesfunds, supplies, companions
(Acts 15:3; 20:38; 21:5; 1 Cor. 16:6, 11; 2 Cor. 1:16; Titus 3:13;
3 John 6).
The reasons Paul wants to go to Spain are not clear. Spain represented the western end of the Mediterranean and thus would complete the arc from Jerusalem over the northern half of the
Mediterranean. In other words, the goal of Spain may be part of
Pauls larger missionary vision, but nowhere does he say that.
Christian tradition is divided over whether he reached his destination.
The available evidence does not indicate any churches in Spain until
the second century A.D. What is clear is that achieving the goal would
be difficult. No substantial Jewish population existed in Spain until the
third and fourth centuries A.D. Any mission to Spain would be a genuine pioneer venturethere were few Jews and few if any synagogues
to serve as a base. At best there were a few God-fearers or proselytes.
Such a mission would require a level of planning and support that
would be very different from Pauls earlier work. The support of Rome
would be critical.
But before Paul can move west he must complete his mission in
the east. The but now at the beginning of v. 25 repeats the but now
at the beginning of v. 23. But now there is no longer a place in the
east, but now I am going to Jerusalem. The phrase indicates an
important transition. Paul must round off his mission in the east by
delivering a collection from the churches of Macedonia and Achaia to
the poor among the holy ones (or, the saints) in Jerusalem.
The description of the Jerusalem Christians may denote actual economic poverty, but it may also reflect a self-understanding of the
Jewish Christians there that flowed from a broader Jewish view of the
significance of Jerusalem as the city of both the holy and the
oppressed (the poor). Paul mentions only the churches closest to
Rome even though other churches also contributed (e.g., Galatia
1 Cor. 16:1, AsiaActs 20:4), and he emphasizes that the churches
of these regions decided to raise the money (they resolved, v. 26). The
language used to describe the offering is theologically weightedit was
an act of service (lit., deaconing), an act of fellowshipping or mutual
sharing (the same word for sharing the blood and body of Christ in
1 Cor. 10:16; the Holy Spirit in 2 Cor. 13:13, 14, Phil. 2:1; the gospel
in Phil. 1:5; Christs sufferings in Phil. 3:10; the faith in Philem. 6), a
moral obligation, a priestly or cultic service, and a fruit.
Romans 15:1416:27
355
356
Romans 15:1416:27
Romans 15:1416:27
357
358
Romans 15:1416:27
Romans 15:1416:27
359
360
Romans 15:1416:27
and influential roles are attributed to the women, despite their smaller
number, than to the men. Romans documents that men and women
were equals in the leadership of the churches in the Pauline mission.
Romans also suggests the established patriarchal status in the
household is not important in the churches. Prisca, Junia, and Julia
are not identified as wives, nor are the other named women linked to
fathers or husbands. Paul greets the women in Rome because of their
commitment to the gospel and leadership in the church, not because
of their family relationships.
Third, the names tell us a good deal about the ethnic and socioeconomic composition of the churches in Rome. There are typical
Jewish names in the listPrisca and Aquila, Andronicus and Junia,
Herodion, Aristobulus, Mary, and Rufus. Most of the names are
Gentile, which may reflect the ethnic balance in the churches. Some
of the people have economic resourcesPrisca and Aquila,
Andronicus and Junia, Epaenetus, Aristobulus, Narcissusthey can
travel and have households. The majority of names were common
among slaves, freedmen and freedwomenAmpliatus, Urbanus,
Stachys, Tryphaina, Tryphosa, Persis, Rufus, Asyncritus, Phlegon,
Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas, Philologus and Julia (probably a husband
and wife), Nereus. Many of the names were found among slaves of
imperial households. The churches of Rome reflect a cross section of
the lower half of the socioeconomic scale with the majority coming
from the lower strata of Roman society.
Fourth, the Jewish-Christian names confirm that after Claudius
edict of expulsion of Jewish people was lifted, Jewish Christians did
return to Rome again.
Finally, the greetings document that the Christians of Rome were
organized into various house churches. There were distinct congregations rather than one single congregation. The Christians of Rome, as
in the other parts of the Roman Empire, initially met in the homes of
members who could afford large houses. Archaeological findings indicate that these homes had room for 40 to 80 people. The letter which
Paul is concluding would thus be passed from house church to house
church and read aloud and discussed anew each time.
Paul concludes the greetings with a final exhortation and a third
person greeting. The formula, greet one another with a holy kiss, is
used regularly in the Pauline letters (1 Cor. 16:20; 2 Cor. 13:12;
1 Thess. 5:26; also in 1 Pet. 5:14). Kissing (cheek to cheek) as a form
of greeting reflects a widespread practice in the Orient. The addition
of holy indicates it was an act of family bonding in the Christian community. All the churches of Christ greet you is unique in Paul.
Romans 15:1416:27
361
Practically it must refer to the churches which Paul has founded. But
that itself is significant. Paul speaks for all of the churches in his mission as he concludes his letter to the Roman Christians and heads for
Jerusalem with the offering.
The greetings of Romans 16 are very inclusivegender, ethnic
identity, and socioeconomic status are not important. That is a very
appropriate ending to a letter which has argued for the impartiality of
God toward all people.
362
Romans 15:1416:27
Romans 15:1416:27
363
16:25-27 Doxology
Paul ends the letter with praise to God. The structure of the doxology
is poetical and liturgical.
to the one powerful to strengthen you
according to my gospel
and the preaching of Jesus Christ
according to the revelation of the mystery
having been preserved in silence from eternity
but now having been made known
through the writings of the prophets (the entire
Scriptures)
according to the order (command) of the eternal God
to the obedience of faith
to all the nations
having been made known
to the only wise God
through Jesus Christ
to that one be glory for the ages. Amen.
The doxology sums up the central themes of the letter and uses some
of its significant language: the power of God (1:16/v. 25), the gospel
and the preaching of Christ (1:3, 9 // v. 25; specifically, according
to my gospel in 2:16 // v. 25), the revelation of the mystery (3:21;
11:24 // v. 25), the fulfillment of the Scriptures (1:2, 3:21, 15:4 //
v. 26), the obedience of faith to all the nations (1:5; 15:18 // v. 26);
the ascription of glory to God (11:36, 15:6-9 // v. 27).
Romans is about God. It begins and ends with God. The power of
364
Romans 15:1416:27
The Context
The theology of a writing answers a question(s). It addresses a reality or
issue(s). Romans is a pastoral letter intended to reconcile differing groups
of believers in the house churches of mid-first century Rome. Paul writes
Romans to make the case for his gospel against two group theologies and
their accompanying social practices, Jewish-Christian ethnocentrism
which excluded Gentiles from the people of God, and Gentile Christian
ethnocentrism which claimed that God had judged and rejected the Jewish
people. The audience is primarily Gentile Christians with a Jewish history
(God-fearers or proselytes), but also Jewish Christians, both of whom have
questions about each other and about God. The letter answers a series of
questions. What is required to be members of Gods people? What about
Gods dealings with Israel? Underlining these questions is the most fundamental one of all, what kind of God is God? Is God righteous or not?
The Center
The theological center of Romans is the gospel of Gods salvation for
all people. The gospel is first and foremost about God. It reveals the
righteousness of God, the faithful and true One who keeps faith with
Gods promises and word. The gospel as the revelation of the righteousness of God reveals eschatological judgment against all Sin and
salvation from the power of Sin.
365
366
367
ing the promises to Israel in the gospel of salvation for all people. God
will also save Israel in fulfillment of these promises.
The Consequence
According to Romans, life is not lived in a neutral zone. Human life
exists in power zones, either the power sphere of Sin or the power
sphere of God. Gods salvation in Messiah Jesus effects a transfer
from the power sphere of Sin to the power sphere of the Spirit.
The powerful gospel of Gods salvation calls for new life in the
Spirit and obedience. To be made righteous by the gospel of Gods
salvation means a slavery to righteousness (6:15f.). It means to live
in the Spirit. The Christian life in Romans is defined more as life in
the Spirit than as a life of faith. The life of obedience to which the
gospel calls is made possible because of the indwelling and empowerment of the Spirit. The evidence of the new obedience, of the new
righteousness, is found in how the Christians in Rome deal with one
another, how they resolve their tensions in the churches, how they
welcome one another in love. Chapters 1215 are the practical test
case of the gospel of Gods salvation. The center is a remade and
transformed mind that thinks and lives like Christ, who welcomes
everyone by not pleasing himself but rather taking on the dishonor of
others for the fulfillment of the promises of God (15:3).
The Sum
The theology of Romans is theologically centered. God effects apocalyptic, end-time salvation. God does this through the faithfulness of
Jesus. Everything God does, everything that matters for Paul, everything that believers are and hope for, pivots on Jesus in whom and
through whom God effects salvation. Two prepositional phrases are
critical in Romans, through Christ and in Christ Jesus. Jesus is the
agent through whom God has acted, is acting, and will act. Everything
believers have is in Christ: baptized into Christ (6:3), dead to sin
and alive to God (6:11), no condemnation (8:1), the life of the Spirit
(8:9-11), the love of God (5:5, 8), union with God (8:39).
God effects salvation in Messiah Jesus by creating a new people,
baptized into Christ, who live by the eschatological Spirit. Gods salvation knows no favorite people, but it also keeps faith with the prior
promises of God to Israel. God effects salvation so that people shall
live differently now in the context of the church.
The theology of Romans makes the claim that God is righteous
and acts righteously. God is righteous because God keeps faith. God
acts righteously by making people and the cosmos righteous in and
368
Essays
CHIASMUS A chiasmus is a symmetrical structure involving some form of
inversion, or the reversing of word order in parallel phrases, around a central
idea. Several different forms of chiasm are used in the New Testament:
370
Essays
Essays
371
and the growing conflict between the Jews and Rome that resulted from the
increased influence of extremist movements in Judaism throughout this period. A mid-century tax revolt in Rome that was supported by the Jews reinforces this picture.
3) The Jewish messianic interpretation of Chrestus agitation fits the patriotic nature of Roman Jewish relations with Jerusalem. From the outset, the
Jews of Rome maintained close political and intellectual affiliation with
Palestine and Jerusalem. Most of the Jewish residents in Rome originally
came from Palestine as immigrants or captives. They paid the Temple Tax
and went on pilgrimages to Jerusalem. Roman Jews followed events in
Jerusalem and Palestine closely, and expressed national loyalties in public
demonstrations. For example, following the death of Herod the Great in
4 B.C. his sons presented their case to Augustus. A delegation of 50
Palestinian Jews also came to Rome to plead with Augustus that Palestine be
placed under a governor appointed by Rome, rather than under the Herodian
family. Some 8000 Roman Jews supported the Palestinian delegation. The
leaders of Palestinian Jewry, in turn, took great interest in the Roman communities and made frequent visits to Rome. The constant interchange
between Palestinian and Roman Judaism is confirmed in Acts 28:21; the
Jewish leaders in Rome say to Paul, we have received no letter from
Jerusalem about you. It is not difficult to imagine messianic agitations in
Rome as relations between Rome and Jerusalem deteriorated during the 40s
and 50s, and as relations between Roman Jews and the government
remained fragile, even tense.
4) The Jewish messianic interpretation of Chrestus agitation fits the contents and tone of a letter from Claudius to Alexandria in A.D. 43. The letter
warns that Jews must not import political agitators from Syria and upper
Egypt. If they do, Claudius will proceed against them with righteous anger
and force.
The agitations of Chrestus in Rome in the late 40s look like what Claudius
warned against in A.D. 43. Claudius responded by expelling the Jews from
Rome. It was a local police action taken in the interests of peace. The cause
was political agitation within the Roman Jewish community, an agitation that
has all the appearances of zealot motivations and goals.
See Benko, 1969; Borg, 1972.
DEATH IN ROMANS Death is especially prominent in Romans 58. The
noun form, thanatos, occurs 22 out of 47 times in Paul (120 in the NT). Only
the Gospel of John shows a comparable interest in death (19 times). The verbal form, to die (apothnsk), is used 23 out of 42 times in Paul (113 in the
NT). Again, the only comparable writer is John with 28 uses. Twenty-one of
the 22 references to death in Romans are found in chs. 5-8 (1:32death as
the judgment of Godis the exception). Seventeen of the 23 occurrences of
to die are found in chs. 58 (the six occurrences outside these chapters are
all in ch. 14: vv. 7, 8, 9, 15).
Death language in Romans indicates several things. First, the dominant
association is Sin (5:12, 17, 21; 6:16, 21, 23; 7:5, 10, 13; 8:2). Death also
is associated negatively with the law (7:10, 13) and flesh (8:6).
Second, death is a personal and cosmic power, just like Sin (cf. 1 Cor. 15
where it is one of the principalities and powers). It rules by itself (5:14, 17)
and through Sin (5:21). Death is Death. Sin is the procreator of Death. Sin
372
Essays
and Death are inseparable allies. They are the supreme powers of the old age
which rule all human beings and creation. Death/death is a paradigm of all
reality and existence; it is both a symbol and reality of a cosmos that is
opposed to God and is ruled by opponents of God. This understanding of
Death is framed through cosmic apocalyptic categories [see Notes on 5:1221, as well as the Introduction to this commentary, The Larger Thought
World of Romans, and Essay: Sin].
Third, while the verbal form to die carries some of the same association
as the noun, its use reflects a very significant shift of focus. To die is still associated with Sin (5:15), law (7:2, 3, 6, 10), and flesh (8:13). However, the verb
form is associated much more with Christ and his work. Its primary usage is
to describe the death of Christ as a saving event (5:6, 8; 6:9, 10; 8:34;
14:15). It also describes the death of Christians to Sin through union with
Christ (6:2, 7, 8), and the reality of death in Christ at the time of physical
death. Over against the negative association of dying, to die is linked positively with the grace of God (5:15), overcoming the rule of Sin and death
(6:9), freedom from the law (7:2, 3), life in the Spirit (7:6; 8:13), the gift of
life itself (8:13; 14:7).
Death has multiple meanings in Romans. At one level it refers to biological death (6:6; 7:2-3; 8:38; 14:7, 8). Second, death denotes punishment for
sinsfor transgression of the will of God (e.g., 1:32). Third, death refers to a
sacrificial act, either Christs atonement for sins (5:6, 8, 10) or a heroic death
for another person (5:7). Fourth, it means eschatological Death, which in
turn denotes different things: a) Death is a cosmic power and ruler (5:12, 14,
17, 21; 6:9) that b) results in separation from God (5:12, 14, 17, 21; 6:9,
16, 21, 23; 7:5, 10, 13; 8:6, 38). Alternatively, c) death can refer to Christs
victory over Sin and Death (5:15-19; 6:9, 10). Fifth, death refers to the
Christians death to Sin (6:3, 4, 5, 7, 8), or failure to die to Sin (8:2, 6, 13).
This understanding results in a series of moral exhortations that Christians forsake Sin and sins, because they have already died to Sin and sins. Death here
is a past event, which is a motive for Christian ethical behavior. Finally, and
closely related to this moral understanding, Death is a punishment for
enslavement to Sin and willful sinning (6:16-19; 7:7-25). Sin means existential estrangement from God, but, more significantly, eschatological separation
from God, Death.
Pauls interpretation of death is profoundly Christological. In addition to
the six verbal associations, the noun death is associated with Christs death
five times (5:10; 6:3, 4, 5, 9). Christ is the antidote to Death and death. He
gives his life in death (5:6-10) and triumphs over Death (6:9, 10). The form
of the antidote is the reign of grace (5:17, 21); life (5:21; 6:4, 5, 21, 23; 7:5;
8:2, 6), including Christs being raised from the dead (6:9); righteousness
(5:17; 6:16); the Spirit (7:5; 8:2, 6); peace (8:6). The triumph of Christ over
Death guarantees Christians that they will not experience eschatological
deathnothing, not even Death, will separate them from God (8:38).
Christ is the antidote to Death because his life, death, and resurrection
effected a shift from this age to the age to come. That shift redefines Death
by robbing it of its ultimate power to rule humanity and creation. The liberation of human beings and creation from the power of Death has already
begun through the power of Christs victory over Death.
Pauls interpretation of death is also profoundly moral. Mortality and
morality are linked. Death is the tragic result of Adams moral failure, and a
Essays
373
punishment for the moral failure of all his descendants, except Jesus. When
believers die with Christ they die to Sin and sins, and thus also to the power
of Death. That results in morality, in lives that resist and triumph over Sin.
Pauls interpretation of death in Romans uses the language of cosmic
apocalyptic, Death, much more than forensic apocalyptic, death. Death is
primarily Death; it is a function of the rule of evil cosmic powers. Therefore,
Paul interprets the meaning of Christs death and resurrection as victory over
Sin and Death. An atonement interpretation of Christs deathdeath as forgiveness of sinsdoes not address Death due to Sin. Salvation language
must always address the problem of Sin. Sin as Sin and Death must be triumphed over by death as defeat of the powers and resurrection as victory over
the powers.
For further study, consult: Beker, 1990; Bailey, 1979; C. Black, 1984; de
Boer, 1988; Keck, 1969.
DEATH/BAPTISM AS RITUAL EVENTS Death and baptism are very
important religious ritual events in the ancient world. Paul builds on this
understanding in Romans 6.
Death is a radical, separating boundary-line event. It is a rite-of-passage
that fundamentally transforms the life of the individual and society. It separates an individual from an immediate past world, and transitions the person
into another realm in all cultures that believe in some form of life after death
(a common belief in the first-century Jewish and Greco-Roman world).
All cultures develop rituals designed to mark and interpret the transition
that occurs in life crisis events (besides death, these include birth, puberty,
marriage, and entrance into a religious community). The transformation that
occurs in such events is commonly understood to involve three phases: separation, transition, and (re-) incorporation. The dominant symbols of these
stages are death, change, resurrection or rebirth.
Death ends life in this world, and terminates all relationships in an individuals life worldmarriage, family, religious affiliation, political status, and
role. Mourning symbolizes the redefinition of all relationships. Burial, a very
important ritual in the ancient world, initiates and transitions the deceased
into community of the dead. A person who is not buried has not died fully,
that is, has not been transitioned into the next form of life, the company of
the other dead. Death and burial in the ancient world usually occurred on the
same day.
The rite of passage marks the transition from one status to another. The
person involved is set apart from the rest of society. Normal structures no
longer count, because this person is being transformed, has permanently left
one community and has entered a new one. The dead person lives an existence which no longer has the destiny of death, but rather rebirth of some sort
(however that is defined in the culture, i.e., the liberation of the soul from the
body in much Greek thought).
Three other things are noteworthy about the language of death rituals in
the ancient world. First, there is talk of new knowledge, a new ethic, a new
manner of acting, which is appropriate to the new mode of existence.
Second, there is talk of a future form of existence which is experienced partially and before the appropriate time (prolepticallythe time frame for this
experience varies in different cultures). The person who has died is not-whathe/she-once-was and not-yet-what-he/she-shall-be. Third, the transition
374
Essays
from this life to the new form of life is led by an initiator who has gone
through the entire process of transformation. Total submission to this initiator is required to complete the process of change. Enslavement language is
characteristically used to define the relationship to the initiator.
Baptism was a highly significant rite-of-passage event that was practiced by
most religious communities. A person was separated from his/her past religious
world, transitioned to a new religious community, and promised a new form of
life in the future. Baptism had two meanings: 1) it cleansed the person from the
pollution of evil (a ritual purification), and 2) it effected the death of the person
(a ritual of death-burial). Both the cleansing and death-burial were understood to
effect a separation from the previous life world, and to incorporate the person
into a new world complete with new knowledge and a new ethic.
Paul uses death and baptism as rite-of-passage events in Romans 6 to
interpret the meaning of Christian baptism into Christs death. Paul argues
that Christians have really died in baptism into Christ. A radical separation
from the Sin structured world of the past has occurred (vv. 2, 6, 7, 11) and
an incorporation into a new community of the redeemed has taken place
(vv. 3, 4, 6). Life in the new mode of existence is different; it is characterized
by walking in newness of life (v. 4), freedom from Sin (vv. 6, 7, 11), and living with God (v. 11). This transitional mode will be transformed in the future
into a resurrection mode of existence (vv. 5, 8).
It must be emphasized that Pauls understanding of baptism was not
uncommon in the ancient world. For example, baptism was required in
Judaism for proselytes from paganism. The event was defined as a death and
rebirth event that was so radical it changed all relationships; the husband-wife
bond and the parent-child bonds were dissolved and needed to be reformed
in the context of the new mode of life and community as reborn Jewish
relationships.
What is new in Paul is the definition of the rite of passage events as in
Christ. Existing rituals are redefined messianically, e.g., baptism into Christ,
death in the Lord (14:7-8).
See Carlson, 1993; Daube, 1981.
DIATRIBE A diatribe is an ancient literary form that narrates a dialogue,
a conversation, between a teacher and an imaginary student. It is a form of
the Socratic question-and-answer method of teaching. The intent is to raise
questions or state objections the teacher knows the student will have with the
argument just made. The purpose is to point out errors in thinking in order
to persuade.
The context for a diatribe is instructional. The questioner is a student, not
an enemy or opponent. The conversation is dialogical, not polemical.
Paul uses the diatribe more often in Romans than in any other letter. The
form of the diatribe in ancient literature and in Paul varies. The most common
forms used in Romans are: 1) a sudden turn to address an imaginary questioner (e.g., 2:1-5, 17-24; 9:19-21; 11:17-24; 14:4); 2) a response to an
immediately preceding objection or false conclusion (e.g., 3:1-9, 31; 4:1-2a;
6:1, 15; 7:7, 13; 9:14, 19; 11:1, 11, 19); 3) a dialogical exchange (e.g.,
3:274:25).
The use of the diatribe does not mean a change of subject or the beginning of a new argument, as often thought, but the sharpening of the issues
raised and a concretizing of their meaning.
Essays
375
The best study of the diatribe form and its use in Romans is Stowers,
1981 and 1988.
FAITH IN ROMANS Faith is such a common word in Christian faith that
its meaning is assumed. Faith is usually understood as belief, i.e., the acceptance that something is true, or trust i.e., confidence in someone or something. The primary focus is subjective response, e.g., I believe, or I trust.
A series of studies have raised serious questions about these assumed
meanings. These studies have shown that in the Greek language and in Greek
Jewish literature (the translation of the OT into Greek, the Septuagint; the
Apocrypha; the Pseudepigrapha; Philo; and Josephus) the commonly
assumed meaning of pistis as faith or trust is in fact the minority meaning. The Septuagint never uses pistis as faith or trust. It uses faith (pistis) to translate the Hebrew emunah, which means firmness, certainty,
dependability. The dominant meanings of faith in the LXX are 1) pledge, reliability, or faithfulness, 2) proof or evidence. The focus is the ground for faith,
the basis on which subjective trust or belief may be founded. This interpretation of faith in Greek Jewish literature is in continuity with the meaning of
faith in classical Greek. Faith from the seventh century B.C. through the
fourth century A.D. basically means two things: 1) trust in others which is evidenced in action or behavior; 2) persuasion of a thing, confidence, assurance
(see Liddell and Scott). James Kinneavy concludes a comparison of faith in
Greek rhetoric and the NT by asserting that the pistis (faith) of the NT can
almost always be interpreted as persuasion (1987:147). With very few
exceptions, he argues, the noun faith can be interpreted persuasion and the
verb believed as was persuaded.
Faith is a very important word in Romans. Its occurrence is the second
highest of any writing in the NT, 62 times compared to 98 in the Gospel of
John. The use of the verbal form (to believe, pisteuein) is the third highest
in the NT (John = 98, Acts = 37, Romans = 22), and the use of the noun
form (faith, pistis) is the highest in the NT, 40 times).
A study of the use of faith (pistis) in Romans reveals some very interesting things that are important clues to the meaning. First, the use of the word
is clustered, as follows:
35 times in chs. 1-4
3 times in chs. 5-8
14 times in chs. 9-11
10 times in chs. 12-16
Within this clustering, there is a further narrowing of use. In chs. 14, 28 of
the 35 uses, or 45% of the use in the entire letter, occur in chs. 34. And in
chs. 911, 13 of the 14 uses, or 21% of the use in the letter, are found in
chs. 910. Sixty-six percent of the faith vocabulary occurs in four chapters.
All of these chapters are particularly concerned with issues of Jewish relationships to the gospel. Chs. 58, often viewed as the critical description of
the Christian life in Romans, use faith only three times.
Second, Paul creates many unique faith phrases in Romans that are not
found anywhere else in the NT. The letter opens and closes with to the obedience of faith (eis hypakon pistes) in 1:5 and 16:26. A form of to all the
ones believing (panti to pisteuonti) from 1:16 is repeated in 3:22, 4:11, and
10:4. Paul speaks in other letters of the ones believing, but never of all the
ones believing. Out of faith to faith (ek pistes eis pistin) in 1:17 is unique
376
Essays
Essays
377
comparison of the other prepositional phrases in the Pauline letters that use
faith. What is immediately apparent is that Paul in Romans does not talk
about faith into Christ (eis) as in Galatians 2:16 and Philippians 1:29, or
faith in Christ as in Ephesians 1:13 or Colossians 1:4.
Concomitant with the absence of faith in Christ phrases, is a sixth observation. The primary object of faith in Romans is God (4:5, 17, 18, 24; 10:9,
11). Christ is the probable object of faith in 6:8. The law is the object in 9:33.
There is something very God-centered about faith in Romans.
Finally, it is worth noting what is absent from faith language in Romans.
Paul never speaks of faith alone. James (2:24) is the only NT writer to use
this phrase. And Paul never makes faith the subject of an imperative; he never
issues a command to faith.
Two other phenomena are significant. The first is the use of the phrase
out of faith (ek pistes). Paul uses the phrase only in Romans and Galatians;
12 times in Romans, and nine in Galatians plus two uses with the word hearing (out of the hearing of faith, ex akos pistes, 3:2, 5). In Romans it is
used seven times with righteousness words (1:17 [2x], 3:26, 30; 5:1; 9:30;
10:6), three times with law (4:16 [2x]; 9:32), twice with doubt/sin (14:23).
Galatians associates the phrase with righteousness five times (2:16; 3:8, 11,
24; 5:5), and once each with sons (3:7), blessing (3:9), promise (3:22), law
(3:11), plus the 3:2, 5 uses of out of hearing of faith associated with the
Spirit. Three times the phrase is used to contrast faith and law in Romans
(4:16; 9:32; 10:5-6). The same contrast is found twice in Galatians (3:11;
5:4-5). Out of faith contrasts once with works of law, plus the 3:2, 5 contrast of hearing of faith with works of law. The phrase is concerned with the
source or ground of righteousness or salvation. Righteousness, family relationship, promise, blessing are based on faith, Christs, Abrahams, the
Christians. They are not grounded in the law or in works of the law.
Why the use of this distinctive phrase only in Romans and Galatians?
Something peculiar to these letters must lie behind this use. The phrase is
used only once in the LXX, in Habakkuk 2:4. That text is quoted twice by
Paul, Romans (1:17) and Galatians (3:11). The out of faith phrase in Romans
and Galatians is probably a direct function of Pauls citation of Habakkuk. The
Habakkuk citation, we have seen, is a messianic reference; it speaks about the
Messiah as the one who lives out of faith or faithfulness. The source of faith
in Habakkuk, as understood by Paul, is Messiah Jesus.
The second significant phenomenon is the close correlation of faith and
obedience in Romans. The letter is framed by the phrase the obedience of
faith. The phrase is programmatic. Paul signals the closest possible relationship between faith and obedience. Faith is defined by obedience, and obedience is defined by faith. The German Glaubensgehorsam, obedience in
faith, comes close to Pauls meaning.
The problem of the Israelites in 10:16 is that they have not obeyed the
gospel (hupkousan t euangeli). Paul never combines faith with the
gospel to mean acceptance of the gospel, but he here defines acceptance of
the gospel as obedience to the gospel. He describes the goal of his mission
in 15:18 as the obedience of the Gentiles. In 16:19 the obedience of the
Roman Christians is known among Christians all over the world, while in 1:8
it was the faith of the Roman Christians that was proclaimed in the whole
world. Faith and obedience are essential equivalents in Romans. The one cannot be understood apart from the other.
378
Essays
Reception
Response
Behavior
Faith
hear gospel be persuaded
trust in/commit to
Obedience
hear gospel submit
do/act
Faith and obedience belong together in Paul; they qualify each other reciprocally. There cannot be faith without obediencefaith without obedience is
dead (James 2)and there cannot be obedience without faith.
The structure of faith in Romans 4 underlines this close relation. It may
be outlined as follows:
Gods gift as grace
Acceptance of the gift through faith
The covenant of righteousness through the law
Obedience to the law as the way of faith
The call of God to Abraham is Gods gift of salvation. Abraham responded through faith. The covenant through circumcision symbolized the core of
the law. Abraham obeyed, and this was his way of faith. Faith and obedience
are one action. Faith is demonstrated by obedience.
This structure of faith is grounded in the biblical story, first in the story of
Abraham and then in the story of Israel as a people. God saved Israel out of
Egypt (Exod. 20:2). Israel accepted this gift by following Moses. The covenant
was contracted at Sinai. Keeping the law, symbolized by the Passover event,
is obedience as the way of faith.
What is faith in Romans in light of this evidence? It involves three things.
First, faith is evidence or pledge that provides the ground for trust. It concerns
the basis for persuasion, for reliability, for dependability. The basis for faith in
Romans is God and Jesus. God is the righteous one, the one who is faithful.
Essays
379
God is faithful when humans are unfaithful (3:3). The righteousness of God
is revealed out of faith (1:17). The evidence is Jesus who reveals Gods endtime faithfulness through his own faithfulness to God, the faith of Jesus. The
unique out of faith phrase from the messianically interpreted Habakkuk citation articulates the ground of faith. Jesus is the basis of faith; he is the epistemological ground of faith. Christ is the pledge or assurance from God which
grounds and makes possible human faith.
Second, faith involves commitment to, trust in God. Human beings must
respond to the evidence of Gods faithfulness, to the pledge of Gods faithfulness in Christ. The nature of that trust, defined most clearly in Romans 4, is
trust in God to do the impossible, to hope against hope. The object of this
trust in Romans is almost always God. Trust is God-centered. It is the persuasion that God is faithful, and can be counted on to keep promises.
Third, faith as trust is expressed in evidence or in pledge, called obedience
in Romans. Doing the will of God, living as though the promise of God is a
reality, whether that is Jesus (the faith of Jesus), or Abraham (the faith of
Abraham), or a Christian believer (to all the ones believing or acting from
faith when eating or not eating), is the evidence of trust. Faith is faithfulness.
That is who God is, that is how Jesus lived, that is how Abraham lived, and
that is how followers of Jesus are called to live.
This understanding of faith is very biblical. Paul is interpreting faith as
understood in the Hebrew Scriptures, now refracted through Messiah Jesus as
the evidence of Gods faithfulness and through the inclusion of all peoples in
Gods people.
Faith as evidence and trust functions in a very specific way in Romans.
First, faith equalizes all people and universalizes salvation. Faith involves all
the ones believing, no distinction, Abraham, Jew and Gentile, circumcised
and uncircumcised. Faith rejects all forms of particularitye.g., law, works of
law, circumcision, boastingthat exclude some people from incorporation
into Gods peoplee.g., Gentiles, uncircumcised.
Second, faith assures Gods end-time salvation for human beings.
Different words for this salvation are usedrighteousness, promise, reconciliation, son/daughtership, access to God. The point is that all people, irrespective of racial or religious heritage, may experience or participate in Gods
gift of salvation on the same basisfaith as trust in the evidence of Gods
faithfulness.
Third, faith linked to obedience serves to unify divided groups. The obedience of faith incorporates the code words of the various groups in Rome
by reminding them that Gods salvation calls for a response of trust that consists of obedience. Faith that does not submit to righteousness, that does not
welcome the other, is not faith.
For further reading, see: Bartsch, 1968; D. Campbell, 1992; Corsani,
1994; Du Toit, 1991; Hay, 1989; Howard, 1973-74; Kinneavy, 1987;
Lindsay, 1993; ORourke, 1973; Stowers, 1989.
FLESH IN ROMANS Flesh, sarx, is a distinctively Pauline term. It is used
91 times in the Pauline letters (out of 147 uses in the NT). The 26 occurrences in Romans represent the greatest use in Paul (and the NT). Galatians
follows with 18 occurrences, 1 and 2 Corinthians with 11 each. In addition,
Paul uses two flesh derivatives, both meaning fleshly in 7:14 (sarkinos)
and in 15:27 (sarkikois).
380
Essays
Essays
381
Flesh in Chs. 14
The negative, contrast understanding of flesh in chs. 68 is evident already in
Pauls earlier references. The context for the 2:28 reference is a critique of
Jewish boasting in the law and in circumcision. Flesh refers to circumcision
as a physical act in the flesh and stands in contrast to circumcision in secret,
a circumcision of the heart in the Spirit (2:28). Flesh is linked with boasting
and the letter of the law, and is juxtaposed to the Spirit.
Even the apparently neutral reference in 3:20 to no flesh being made
righteous through works of law is probably more negative than thought.
Pauls change of the Psalm 143:2 citation from all life to all flesh is significant. All life and all flesh both express universalism, that is, all people. But
given the earlier linkage of flesh and circumcision, Paul seems to summarize 2:25-29 and answer the question about the advantage of circumcision
raised in 3:1. Not only is no one justified by works of law, but specifically no
circumcised flesh is justified by works of the law (e.g., circumcision).
Similarly, the apparently neutral description of Abraham as our forefather according to the flesh (4:1) is linked to being made righteous by works
and boasting, and is juxtaposed to God (4:2). Kinship with Abraham is not
all it was made out to be.
Christ according to the flesh
The one reference in chs. 14 to Christ as descended from David according
to the flesh (1:3) is the first of three references to Christ in association with
the flesh in Romans; the other two are 8:3 and 9:5. The 1:3 identification of
Jesus as a Davidic descendant according to the flesh is a clear statement of
kinship. But the contrast, appointed son of God in power according to the
Spirit of holiness, indicates immediately that Jesus is more than according to
the flesh.
The 8:3 reference to Jesus in the likeness of sinful flesh makes the point
that Christs mission was to defeat Sin in the flesh in order that the law of
God could be fulfilled. The flesh is something Christ identifies with to overcome.
In 9:5 out of whom the Christ, the one according to the flesh, clearly
denotes physical descent and kinship. But this advantage of the Jewish people is qualified in two ways. The first is by the little particle to in Greek before
according to the flesh, which means something like insofar as he was according to the flesh. Again, the implication is that there is more to Christ than kinship with the Jewish people. The second qualification is the depreciation of
Jewish kinship that follows immediately, and the contrast of children of the
flesh with children of promise.
It would appear that even the association of Christ with flesh does not
overcome the negative meanings of flesh. Christ is more than flesh.
Flesh in Chs. 911
Apart from the 9:5 reference to Christ according to the flesh, flesh in chs.
911 is used to define Jewish kinship. The Jews are Pauls people according
to the flesh in 9:3. But they are not the real descendants of Abraham; the
children of promise are (9:8). The children of the flesh are the recipients of
Gods hatred (9:13), and are vessels of wrath (9:22). In 11:14 Paul defines the
purpose of his ministry as making jealous the ones of my flesh in order to
save some of them.
Flesh in Chs. 1216
Paul makes two references to flesh in the final chapters. The 13:14 exhorta-
382
Essays
tion to make no provision for the flesh is instructive for his understanding.
The reference occurs in the context of eschatological contrastslight and
darkness, the old and the new aeonsand a listing of the evil deeds of the old
age. It stands in contrast to putting on the armour of light in v. 12 and
Messiah Jesus in v. 14. Flesh represents the darkness of the old age, which is
to be rejected in favor of the light of the new age and Christ.
In 15:17 Paul urges the Roman Christians to share material things (lit.,
fleshly things, sarkikois) with the Christians in Jerusalem because they have
received spiritual things from them. The minor to major argument again
indicates the inferiority of the things of the flesh to the things of the Spirit.
Conclusion
Flesh in Romans is a profoundly negative force. It is a power that leads human
beings into death, which subjects them to Sin. It is so powerful that the law
is not able to control it. Flesh denotes humanity as belonging to the old age
and determined by Sin. The flesh is inferior to the Spirit and normally stands
over against the Spirit. The only antidotes powerful enough to overcome the
power of the flesh are Christ and the Spirit.
The radical contrast of flesh and Spirit must be understood communally
as well as individually. To live according to the flesh is to live within a realm,
within a community with a worldview. The Jews as a people boast in the
flesh (2:28). Pauls language is similar to the Dead Sea Scrolls, which contrast
living in the society of the flesh or the community of the covenant. Pauls
apocalyptic language pictures two distinct communities under the control of
very different powers with distinct ways of life.
For further study, read: Dunn, 1973; Jewett, 1971:49-166; Thiselton,
1975.
GRACE IN ROMANS Grace (charis) is an important theological term in
Protestant Christianity. It is associated with two understandings: 1) salvation
as free gift, in contrast to any human effort to earn it; and 2) grace in opposition to law, with law as the symbol for works-salvation.
Grace is an important word in the NT (155 uses), and especially in the
Pauline letters (100 of the 155 uses). Romans uses grace the most in the
Pauline letters (24 times); 2 Corinthians is next (18 times). The related word
free gift (charisma) is with one exception a Pauline term (17 times in the
NT; six in Rom.; seven in 1 Cor.; 1 Pet. 4:10 is the one non-Pauline use).
The root word for grace, char, means well being (compare shalom in the
OT). Many different meanings are derived from this root: grace, favor, beauty, thankfulness, gratitude, delight, kindness, and benefit. The precise meaning of grace must always be determined by the context in which it is used.
The use of grace in the OT (190 times in the LXX; 61 times as the translation of chen) provides some basic clues to background meaning. Grace
denotes the action of a stronger person who voluntarily chooses to come to
the aid of a weaker person. The stronger person often is God; God acts to
supply grace to the weak or needy (e.g., Gen. 39:21; Exod. 3:21; 11:3;
12:36).
Grace is used in four different ways in Romans. First, it is used in Pauls
greetings (1:7; 16:20) in association with peace, another word for well
being. Paul wishes his readers well, always in God and Jesus Christ.
Second, it means thanks (6:17; 7:25). Paul thanks God for the salvation of
the Roman Christians from enslavement to Sin and from death. Third, grace
Essays
383
is a word for ministry and for gifts of ministry. Pauls own ministry and mission is an act of grace (1:5; 12:3; 15:15). And the ministries of the church
are free gifts (charismata) that are according to grace (kata charis). They are
neither earned nor deserved, but are gifts that are to be exercised for the benefit of others. Fourth, grace means salvation, but with two quite different
though related fields of meaning.
Grace means salvation as gift (3:24; 4:4, 16; 5:2; 11:5, 6). Salvation,
defined by different metaphors (redemption in 3:24; righteousness in 5:2;
election in 11:5), is something that God gives to human beings. Salvation as
grace-gift is often defined over against another reality, Sin (3:24) or mode
of attempted salvation, works (4:4; 11:6 where grace is used three times to
emphasize the gift character).
But grace, as salvation, is more than gift. It also means salvation as power.
In chs. 5 and 6 Paul consistently defines grace as Grace, as the power that
defeats Sin. Grace is understood as an apocalyptic power. It abounds more
than sin as trespass leading to Death (5:15) and Sin (5:20). Grace reigns
over Sin and Death (5:17, 21; 6:1, 14, 15). Grace is the power of God that
comes to the aid of weak, human beings enslaved in the magnetic field of Sin
and Death, and pulls them into the new magnetic field of Righteousness
and Life.
A free gift (charismata) is an effect of grace or a concrete manifestation
of Gods grace. Pauls use of the term follows the same pattern of meaning
as grace. Twice it refers to ministry, Pauls (1:11) and the ministries given to
the church according to grace (12:6). Four times it defines salvation as power
(5:15, 16; 6:23; 11:29). In each of these references free gift as power
stands over against something (acts of sin, either trespass in 5:15 or transgression in 5:16; Sin in 6:23; disobedience in 11:29).
Several things are noteworthy about Pauls grace language in Romans.
First, when Paul uses grace as greetings, thanks, or ministry there is no juxtaposition. Grace is gift from God in whatever form it is given. Second, when
grace is defined as salvation as gift it can stand over against something.
Three of the six salvation as gift uses stand over against Sin (one) or works
(two). Third, all of the salvation as power references are juxtaposed to Sin
or sin (12 times with 3:24). The real enemy of Gods salvation either as gift
or power is Sin, not works as in most Protestant theology. Works is a problem, but a minor problem compared to Sin. Paul uses grace language primarily because humanity needs help; it is enslaved, not because most humans
think they can work their way out of their dilemma. Fourth, grace stresses the
gift character of Gods salvation in whatever form it is given. It can only be
received (5:17). Finally, Paul never juxtaposes grace and law in Romans. In
the one text that has been used to juxtapose grace and law, 4:16, the contrast is faith and law rather than grace and law. Grace does not overcome the
law, but Sin.
For further study see: Bassler, 2003:24-33; Doughty, 1973-74:163-180;
Eastman, 1999; Nardoni, 1993:68-80.
HOMOSEXUALITY Romans 1:25-27 is the most crucial New Testament
text on the question of homosexuality. It offers the most explicit theological
condemnation of homosexual behavior in the NT. It also is the only passage
in the entire Bible that refers to lesbian sexual relations.
Several things about the discussion of homosexuality in this text are
384
Essays
important. First, Paul is diagnosing the human condition, not describing individual acts of homosexual behavior. The story of Romans 1:18f. is about the
human fallhuman rejection of God.
Second, Pauls description of homosexual behavior is illustrative of the
main argument, human rebellion against the Creator. It is thus secondary to
the main point Paul is making. But it is an illustration that Paul and his contemporaries understood. Homosexual behavior is a rejection of the sexual distinctions fundamental to Gods creative design. The Genesis creation stories
are clearly in the foreground of Pauls thinkingGod as Creator (God created . . .), image (God created humankind in his own image . . . male and
female he created them).
Third, the concept of nature (physis) introduced into the argument in
v. 26 makes the point that homosexual behavior rejects the male/female
complementarity of creation. Women and men exchanged the natural use
(kata physin) for that which is contrary to nature (para physin). The repetition of the natural use in v. 27 makes clear that the phrase refers to heterosexual as opposed to homosexual intercourse. The latter is characterized as
contrary to nature. There are many instances in Greco-Roman literature of
the opposition between natural and unnatural. Actions according to nature
(kata physin) are praised and actions contrary to nature (para physin) are
condemned. The opposition is used to distinguish between heterosexual and
homosexual behavior in the absence of a convenient Greek word for heterosexual and homosexual. The rejection of homosexual behavior as contrary to nature also was a common one in Judaism. Josephus, a first century (A.D.) Jewish historian, writes, the law recognizes no sexual connections
except for the natural (kata physin) union of man and wife . . . it abhors the
intercourse of males with males . . . (Ag. Ap. 2:199). Philo, another contemporary of Paul, uses similar language (Spec. Laws. 3:37-42).
Fourth, the reference to both gay and lesbian sexual relations indicates
that Paul is talking about more than the practice of pederasty, adult men
engaging in sexual acts with boys. Paul is concerned with sexual behavior,
which reflects a fundamental rejection of Gods creative design.
Fifth, homosexuality is not the cause of the wrath of God, but the consequence of Gods decision to give up rebellious creatures to follow their own
futile thinking and desires. The deliberate repetition of the verb exchange
forges the link between the rebellion against God and the shameless acts of
v. 27. Both are evidence and consequence of the rebellion against God.
Homosexual behavior for Paul is an illustration of human rejection of God
the Creator. It entails a violation of the creaturely nature of persons. It is
against the nature of the female to have sexual relations with another female,
and it is against the nature of the male to have sexual relations with another
male.
The statements of Paul, and other Jewish writers, must be read against
the background of a hierarchical worldview in which sexual intercourse of
males with males was perceived as a higher form of sex than heterosexual
intercourse. Because the male was viewed as superior to the female, as a
higher form of life within the hierarchy, sex with another male was viewed by
many as superior to sex with a female. Sex with the wife was for procreation.
Sex with a female prostitute or another male was for pleasure. In short,
homosexual practice in much of the ancient world was tied to a negative view
of woman. Furthermore, homosexuality was practiced in the context of sex-
Essays
385
ual switch-hitting, wife and male friend, not as an exclusive form of sexual
relationship. Paul views such ideology and its practice as sexually immoral,
and as evidence of humanitys rebellion against God.
The recent attempt to distinguish sexual acts and sexual orientation is foreign to Paul. Thus, for example, the argument by some scholars that Pauls
condemnation of homosexual behavior in this text applies only to homosexual acts committed by heterosexual persons, not to persons with a homosexual orientation, is to confuse exegesis and hermeneutical presupposition.
Richard Hays counters correctly that the fact is that Paul treats all homosexual activity as prima-facie evidence of humanitys tragic confusion and alienation from God the Creator (1991:19).
Pauls condemnation of homosexual behavior must be qualified by several
observations. First, Paul is not proscribing homosexual behavior in Romans 1,
but using it as an illustration of rebellion against God. To use other words, Paul
is not teaching sexual ethics, but analyzing the tragic human condition that follows from human rejection of God.
Second, homosexual behavior is not defined as more sinful or more reprehensible than the others forms of human rebellion against God listed in
1:28-31. It is a more vivid image of rebellion against Gods creative intentions, but not a more serious sin.
See Balch, 2000; Boswell, 1980; Brooten, 1996; Gagnon, 2001; Hays,
1986; 1991; 1996:379-406; Seow, 1996; Scroggs, 1983; Swartley, 2003;
Wink, 1999.
HONOR-SHAME Personality in the West is defined by individualism. A person is a bounded, unique, more or less integrated self. Persons are taught to
be distinctive wholes and individuals, to stand on their own feet. They act
singly and alone, and are responsible only for their own actions. The core
value of this culture is personal freedom. Until post-modern times sin was
defined as personal guilt. Guilt requires forgiveness, cleansing. More recently
sin has become meaninglessness, which requires meaning or a sense of purpose. Such an understanding of personhood and salvation is a very peculiar
idea in most cultures of the world. Guilt-forgiveness or meaninglessnessmeaning cultures are relatively recent western developments.
Most ancient cultures, and many modern ones (e.g., African, Latino,
Japanese) are honor-shame cultures. The group is prior to and more important than the individual. Groups are unique and distinct, not individuals.
Belonging or being part of a group is the critical value. A person is someone whose self-awareness depends on being part of a group (being embedded). A person is who he/she is perceived to be by the significant others in
the culture, e.g., family, patron, leaders of society, deity (ies). A person internalizes and makes his/her own what the significant others think and say. The
focus of attention is away from the individual ego to the demands and expectations of the others who can grant or withhold reputation. The core social
values of such a culture are honor-shame.
Honor is the value a person has in the eyes of the group. It is the claim
to worth and the acknowledgment of worth by significant others. Such honor
is either ascribedthe honor of family (genealogy), ethnicity or tribe,
wealthor acquiredthe honor achieved by excelling over others.
Name and honor are the central concerns of people in every context of public action. They give purpose and meaning to peoples lives. A good name and
386
Essays
family honor are core values in the culture. Honor is intimately related to power
and wealth. To interact with social, ethnic, or economic inferiors is to recognize
them, to give them status and thus honor, and thereby to lose personal honor.
In such a culture every interaction outside the family involves the recognition of honor or the loss of honor. Every social contact is a contest for honor,
e.g., gift giving, invitations to dinner, seating at dinners, debates, buying and
selling, arranging marriages, business, mutual help.
Acceptance and respect from the significant others, from the primary
group, overshadows all other considerations. Attempts to damage reputation
are constantly made, and must be warded off or honor is lost. To be rejected
by the significant others or the primary group is a death worse than physical
death. People in such cultures go to any length to protect and enhance honor,
and will do anything to avoid the loss of face.
The honorable person is the one who can maintain his/her social boundaries in the interaction of power and respect with others, including God or the
gods. The shameless person is the one who does not observe and/or maintain social boundaries. When honor is violated, what is required is satisfaction,
e.g., the restoration of honor in the eyes of the significant others.
People virtually without any honor in the NT world are marginalized people, such as lepers, the poor, women, slaves, Gentiles in the Jewish world,
Jews in many parts of the Gentile world. Such people are constantly taken
advantage of. They have no means to defend any sense of honor, let alone,
to gain it. They are totally dependent on others, powerful and wealthy patrons
to give them honor, or fathers or husbands in the case of women.
For further reading, see Malina, 1981; Moxnes, 1988a and 1988b;
Neyrey, 1991; Peristiany, 1965; Pitt-Rivers, 1968.
INCLUSIO An inclusio quite literally means the beginning and the end
correspond. A figure of speech, a word, a phrase, a formula, or a citation of
a scripture is used to frame a text. Words or ideas from the beginning of a text
unit are repeated at the end. A text is included, that is, defined, by this literary technique.
Some examples of Pauls use of inclusio in Romans are as follows:
4:3-22a scripture citation
4:3Genesis 15:6
4:22Genesis 15:6
chs. 58a confessional formula
5:1our Lord Jesus Christ
8:39our Lord Jesus Christ
5:1-11an idea
5:1peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ
5:11reconciliation through our Lord Jesus Christ
INTO/WITH CHRIST Paul uses two phrasesinto Christ (en Christ) and
with Christ (sun Christo)in ch. 6 that reflect much wider usage, and are full
of meaning. In each case a preposition, either in (en) or with (sun), is
combined with Christ to say something about the relationship of him and
believers.
The preposition in normally has either a local (e.g., in the space or
domain of), or an instrumental (e.g., by means of) meaning. With has associational meanings.
Essays
387
388
Essays
Essays
389
and organic terms. Behind both lies the idea that Christ is a person who includes
believers. The older language used to describe this reality was corporate personality. Because of problems with that language, current language talks about
solidarity or inclusive personality. Christ is an individuale.g., Jesus, the Son of
God, the Lordbut Christ is more than that. Christ is a representative figure,
just as Abraham and Adam are. Believers in Christ exist in solidarity with him.
The solidarity or representative aspect is defined cosmically and eschatologically in Paul rather than mystically. Christ is the first of a kind, just as Adam and
Abraham were. Each is a progenitor, each initiates a community of people, each
represents a whole world, an order of life and death.
Most of the in Christ and with Christ language occurs in two contexts in
Romanseither as part of the interpretation of what Christs victory over
Adam and Sin means, chs. 68, or in the practical application of what
Christs salvation means for the way the Christians live in Rome. To be in
Christ or to die/live with Christ must be interpreted in light of the other corporate images Paul uses to interpret the meaning of Christs victory over
Adam. In Christ or with Christ are in some sense synonyms for righteousness, grace, life, Spirit, all of which stand over against Adam, Sin, old humanity, body of sin, death, flesh. They describe what it means to be followers of
Christ. Christians are people who exist in a relationship with Christ that
saves them, that makes them participants in the death and resurrection of
Jesus, and that relates them to other Christians in a new organic community
in which Christ is the center and leader (the head) and which is different than
other communities in the world.
See Beker, 1980:272-74; Best, 1955:1-64; Colijn, 1991; Cranfield,
1979, 2:833-35; Moule, 1977:54-69; Sanders, 1977:458-61; Wedderburn,
1985.
LAW IN ROMANS The law (nomos) is a very important sub-theme in
Romans. It is used 72 times out of a total of 119 uses in Pauls letters (compared to 32 uses in Gal., nine in 1 Cor., three in Phil.). Sixty percent of Pauls
uses of law occur in Romans. In addition, the word commandment
(entol) is used seven times in Romans (a total of 14 uses in Pauls letters).
Ten out of the sixteen chapters in Romans have something to say about the
lawit is a subject in every chapter from two through 10, and is the central
theme in two major sections of the letter, 2:123:20 (30 uses) and 7:18:11
(28 uses). Moreover, 10 out of 14 phrases in Paul which define the law by a
genitive noun, e.g., the law of faith or the law of Sin, are found in Romans.
Usage alone indicates that Paul is preoccupied with the question of the
law in Romans. The interpretation of this data has been the subject of much
debate among scholars for centuries, a debate which remains very active to
this day. The diversity of interpretations is so significant that the claim is made
that the person who thinks he/she understands the meaning of the law in Paul
has misunderstood Paul. Part of the problem is that Pauls use of law in
Romans is read through the filter of other letters, especially Galatians.
What is Paul saying about the law in Romans (the relation to what he says
in other letters is the subject of a different essay)?
The Reference of Law
Law has multiple connotations in Romans. Generally and most often it refers
to the Mosaic Law, to the Torah of the Covenant which can be obeyed or disobeyed, done or transgressed, e.g., 2:12, 13; 5:13, 20; 7:7, 12; 13:8, 10.
390
Essays
But it also can be used in a more specific sense to refer to the Pentateuch,
e.g., the law and the prophets (3:21), or it can be used more broadly to refer
to the scriptures as a whole, e.g., whatever the law says in 3:19 as a summary category for the citations of wisdom and prophetic texts in vv. 10-18.
Law also can refer to a specific commandment, e.g., marriage legislation in
7:2-3, the seventh commandment in 7:7. The law can be characterized by the
use of genitive phrases, e.g., the law of God (7:25; 8:7) or of righteousness
(9:31), which define the specific quality of the Mosaic Codeit comes from
God and is righteous or just. But the same genitive construction also can be
used to characterize a law which is against the law, e.g., the law of Sin (7:23,
25) or the law of Sin and death (8:2)the law is linked to Sin and death
rather than life. It is precisely these multiple references that stand behind the
debate about the meaning of law in Romans and in Paul.
The Essence of the Law
Paul says some very positive things about the law in Romans. It is a special
divine gift to Israel (9:4) that is holy, righteous, good, and spiritual (7:12, 14,
16; 9:31). With different terms Paul makes the claim that the essence or the
character of the law is good. It comes from God and participates in the qualities that characterize God.
The Functions of the Law
The good law functions in different ways in the life of Gods people.
1) The law witnesses to the will of God. The law is a great advantage for
the Jewish people (3:2) because it discloses the will of God to Israel (2:18;
7:1-3). It helps them discern what is really important (2:18), because it
teaches knowledge and truth (2:20) and testifies to the righteousness of God
(3:21). Because the Jewish people have this witnessthe oracles of God
(3:2)they have a great advantage over non-Jewish people; they know the
will of God with a clarity that no other people enjoy.
2) The law defines the identity of Israel. The law sets the Jewish people
apart from other people. In contrast to Gentiles who do not have the law by
birth, they have the law by nature (2:12-14). Because of the law they call
themselves Jews (2:17). They are a people who may be characterized as in
the law (3:19) and out of the law (4:14, 16). The law defines who the Jewish
people arethey are the people of the law, resting upon the law (2:17),
instructed from the law (2:18), having the embodiment of knowledge and
truth in the law (2:20). The law, in fact, is so defining that the Jewish people boast in it (2:23; 3:27) and in the works of the law, which mark them
as distinct from the Gentiles [Essay: Works of Law]. The law is the goal that
the Jewish people pursue with all of their energy (9:31), because it is their
great advantage over all other people (3:2).
The law as a definer of a distinct people does not play a role in the universal revelation of Gods righteousness in Messiah Jesus (3:21). That revelation is for all peopleJews and Gentiles. It, therefore, stands in continuity
with the law as scripturethe law and the prophetsbut not the law as
boundary marker between peoples (3:21).
3) The law is a contrast symbol. The law is used in Romans to make a
series of contrasts, law/promise, law/faith, law/grace (4:13-16). The promise
to Abraham and his seed is not a function of the law but of faith. The law
brings Gods wrath because it defines Sin for the people who know the law.
The law does not bring the promise. That is a function of Gods grace, which
is inclusive of all people. The law restrictsit is only for those who are in the
Essays
391
lawwhereas faith and grace are inclusivethey are for all people.
4) The law is a narrative of promise. Paul reinterprets the Abraham story
as a narrative of promise for all people. Abraham, the father of one of the key
restricting symbols of the law (e.g., circumcision), becomes the father of faith
that includes all people (3:274:25). Abrahams faith rather than his circumcision is the foundation of Gods promise to the world. The scriptural narrative of the law redefined by faith upholds the gospel of the righteousness of
God through the faithfulness of Messiah Jesus (3:31).
5) The law defines sin. A dominant theme in Pauls interpretation is that
the law defines Sinthrough the law comes knowledge of Sin (3:20),
where there is no law there is no transgression (4:15), Sin is not counted
where there is no law (5:13), the law entered with the result that trespass
increased (5:20), except for the law I would not have known Sin (7:7),
apart from the law Sin lies dead (7:8), in order that Sin might be shown
to be Sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond
measure (7:13).
The law, because it discloses the will of God, functions to define Sin. It
establishes boundaries, it builds a fence. To cross the boundary or to climb
over the fence, that is, to transgress, is to violate the will of God, to break the
law, and thus to sin. The law defines and exposes Sin/sin as the complete
violation of the will of God.
The language of Paul is carefully nuanced. Sin as power is prior to the
law. The law defines what Sin looks like in human and communal behavior,
e.g., idolatry, covetousness, hatred, lust. The law does not cause Sin, but
defines its shape as that which is exceedingly evil. Sin is understood and
tracked as Sin only in light of the law (5:20 is interpreted as a result clause
rather than a purpose clausesee commentary on 5:20). The law is linked to
Sin/sin in Romans not as a causative factor, and, therefore, itself sinful, but
as a definitive factor, as a definer of how sin is the manifestation of Sin.
The law as the definer of Sin/sin does stimulate sinningenergizes the
passions of sin (7:5), provides a military base (opportunity) for Sin to attack
people (7:8), revives sin (7:9). The creation of boundaries is used by Sin to
stimulate the human imagination and will to step over and thus to sin. This
pull of Sin to sin in turn works death (7:13).
6) The law pronounces the judgment of God. The effect of the laws definition of Sin is that it pronounces judgment upon all human sin. The just
decree of God (1:32) demonstrates that people who transgress the law of
God deserve to die. The law is a standard by which God judges people in the
law, people who have the law (2:12). The citation of the scriptures in 3:1018 uses texts that originally condemned the enemies of Israel but now document that all human beingsJews and Gentilesare under the power of Sin
and thus accountable to judgment. The law brings wrath, that is the just judgment of God, on all who transgress (4:15). Only those who are in Christ
Jesus are freed from this judgment (8:1).
7) The law is a continuing standard for conduct. Messiah Jesus fulfills
the law (8:3-4; 10:4). Gods answer to Sins use of the law and its resulting
judgment is a rescue mission by the Son (8:3) in which Sin in the power
sphere of the flesh is condemned. The result is that the law weakened by the
power of the flesh is overcome. The law is fulfilled in Messiah Jesus for the
followers of Jesus (among us, 8:4). The standard of conduct in the law (the
ethics of walk in 8:4) is fulfilled by the disciples of Jesus who live in the
392
Essays
power sphere of the Spirit, the power which overcomes the power of
Sin/flesh. The Spirit enables the fulfillment of the standard of conduct in the
law.
The precise shape of this fulfillment of the law is outlined in 13:8-10 as
the love of the neighbor, the person in Rome who is different. Love of the
neighbor does not hurt, literally, do evil to the neighbordoes not commit
adultery, does not kill, does not steal, does not covet. Such love, empowered
by the Spirit of Messiah Jesus (8:4), fulfills the law. The law fulfilled by
Messiah Jesus continues to define the conduct of the community of Jesus followers.
The Problematic of the Law
The function of the law just outlined seems straightforward and non-controversial. The law is good and does good things, including defining the nature
of Sin. The law makes it possible to know what Sin is and thus to avoid sinning. What is the problem? Why all the debate about the law in Romans?
The problematic of the law in Romans is a function of several things:
1) the linkage of the law with Sin, the placement of the law on the Sin side
of the continuum of sin to grace, the definition of the law as under the control of Sin rather than the means of controlling Sin, the location of the law
in the present evil age and not in the age to come. 2) The language of no
longer being under the law, died to the law, released from the law in
6:157:6. 3) The defense of the law in Romans 7:78:11 with its notion of
an anti-law, the law of Sin and death. 4) Closely related are the genitive
descriptions of the law, e.g., the law of works, the law of faith, the works of
the law. 5) The relativization of the practice of the law.
The Relation of the Law and Sin
The Judaism of Pauls day linked the law and sin in a positive way. The law
was a means of grace to resist sin. Its function was to guard against sin and
thus lead to deliverance and life. In contrast, Paul links the law and Sin negatively, and does so in a progressive fashion. At level one, the law defines Sin,
energizes Sin, and results in the increase of sin (3:20; 4:15; 5:13, 20; 7:7,
8, 9, 13). At a more profound level, Paul links the law and Sin eschatologically. The law belongs to Adams side of history rather than to Christs. It is
part of the present evil age introduced by the sin of Adam rather than the age
of salvation introduced by Christ (5:12-21). The laws function of defining and
energizing Sin is given eschatological validity by its connection to Adam. This
validation is intensified by the linkage of the law to Sin rather than to grace.
The law results in the increase of sin, not in the revelation or manifestation of
Gods grace, because Sin uses the law to nurture human transgression. The
result is Gods judgment and Death (see the exposition of 6:1f.).
The under the law, died to the law, and released from the law
phrases in 6:157:6
Pauls discussion of the relation of Sin-law-Grace uses negative language
about the law. Baptism into the community of Messiah Jesus means a transfer from the domain of the law to the domain of Grace. Membership in the
community of Jesus followers means no longer living under the law, no
longer obligated to obey all the requirements of the law.
But Paul goes even further. My brethren, which to him always means his
Jewish kinspeople, have died to the law by becoming members of the body
of Messiah Jesus (7:4), and have been released from the law, having died
to that which held them down (7:6).
Essays
393
394
Essays
Essays
395
mary influence in the formation of the NT apostolic letter tradition. The basic
form that Paul usedopening, body, closingfollowed the common letter
pattern of the ancient world. His letters diverge from the common pattern at
two important points. First, his letters are much longer than most and they
are more extensive in all three divisions. Second, most are communal in
nature. They are addressed to Christian house churches, intended to be read
aloud in congregational meetings. Paul speaks to churches in his capacity as
apostle, and most often as founding father. This setting and relationship helps
explain some of the unusual epistolary features of his letters, e.g., the opening prayers of thanksgiving and the closing benedictions, the embedded
hymns and confessions, the summarized doxologies, the appeals to scripture,
the moral instructions, the combination of private opinion and official authority, the generally passionate mood.
The opening and closing of letters were fairly standardized. Paul follows
the general pattern, but modifies it to suit his purposes. A comparison illustrates the similarity and the differences:
Greek Letter Openings
Pauls Openings
Prescript = introduction
Prescript
Author = superscription
Author
Addressee = ascription
Addressee
Greeting = salutation
Greeting
Health Wish
Thanksgiving
Prayer Formula
Prayer Formula
Disclosure Formula
Disclosure Formula
Apart from the length of the opening, Pauls major change is to substitute
a thanksgiving section for the common health wish. This probably reflects
the influence of Hebrew letter form, which usually included a thanksgiving following the prescript.
Greek Letter Closing
Pauls Closing
Final Wish
Hortatory Remarks
Greetings
Peace Wish
Health Wish
Greetings
Holy Kiss Greeting
Grace Benediction
The bodies of Pauls letters are less stereotyped than the opening and
closing patterns. This is expected in letters since the body conveys the specific message that the occasion requires. The one exception to this greater
freedom is the form of the body closing, the section of the body proper that
concludes the body and precedes the closing. The standardized body closing
has three parts: 1) a statement on the motivation for writing; 2) a responsibility clause outlining what is expected of the recipients; and 3) the promise
of a visit. Paul modifies this body closing form by combining the motivation
for writing and responsibility clauses, and inserts a confidence formula, in
which he expresses confidence in the readers faith and ability to follow
through on his teachings. He concludes the body-closing with the promise of
a visit.
For further reading, see Aune, 1987; Gamble, 1977; Kennedy, 1984;
Stowers, 1986; White, 1972; Yoder Neufeld: 351-53.
LIVING IN THE SPIRIT The life of the Jesus follower for Paul is primarily life in the Spirit. The Spirit is referred to 138 times in the Pauline letters
396
Essays
(an additional seven times in the Pastoral Letters). The vast majority of these
references are to the Holy Spirit, that is, the Spirit of God (125 out of 138).
Romans and 1 Corinthians contain the most references, 31 and 36 respectively. Of the 31 references to the Spirit in Romans, 21 occur in chapter 8.
This chapter, Romans 8, is one of Pauls clearest and most expansive statements on the Spirit, specifically on the Christian life as life in the Spirit.
The Spirit is the answer to the power of Sin/Flesh and the ensuing weakness of the law. That is, what the law was not powerful enough to doovercome the power of Sin/Fleshthe Spirit makes possible. Paul characterizes
life in the Spirit in five ways in Romans 8.
Liberation from Sin
The antidote to the law of Sin and Death, the personified powers of evil
which make the law impotent and enslave Israel, is the law of the Spirit of
life in Messiah Jesus. Both laws are constructs of Paul to interpret the
meaning of the two laws in 7:7-12, the Torah of God and the law of Sin.
The Torah of God gives the life intended by God for the law through the Spirit
in the context of the people of Jesus. In addition, the Spirit liberates from the
law of Sin and Death.
One of the key understandings of God in Israel is that Yahweh is the living
God in contrast to the dead idols of the nations. The living God of Israel gave
the law to liberate Israel from evil. What the law was not able to do because of
its enslavement by the cosmic power of Sin God does through another cosmic
power, the Spirit of God. God gives life and freedom from Sin through the
Spirit in the context of the believing community. Therefore, there is no eschatological judgment, no condemnation for those in Messiah Jesus.
In 8:10 Paul adds that those whom Christ indwells (Spirit of God
indwells in v. 8) experience the Spirit of life because of righteousness.
Because Christ has put followers of Jesus in a right relationship with God,
they experience eschatological life, and that despite the fact that their bodies
are dead because of the power of Sin. And in 8:13 the Spirit gives life by
empowering believers to put to death the practices of the body.
Fulfillment of the Law
The Spirit enables the fulfillment of the Law. The law is the central focus of the
long sentence in 8:3-4it begins and ends with the law, for the law weakened
by the flesh . . . in order that the righteous requirement of the law . . . .
The problem of the weakness of the law is overcome by Jesus condemning
Sin in the Flesh. The purpose of this redemptive action is that the righteous
requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us . . . who walk according to
the Spirit. The good and righteous law of God is fulfilled by the power of the
Spirit, by those who live in the power domain of the Spirit. It is not fulfilled by
those who observe the lawe.g., food and festival laws in ch. 14but by the
Spirit (see Gal. 5:13-25 for a similar claim).
Gordon Fee is correct to suggest that Paul interprets the law via a chiastic structure in 7:7-8:4:
A The law is good, just, holy (7:13)[the first law]
B The law is used by another law (7:14-24)[the second law]
C The law of the Spirit of life (8:2a)[the third law]
B The third law sets free from the second law (8:2b)
A The third law fulfills the intent of the first law (8:3-4) (see Fee,
1994:525)
The effectiveness of the Spirits enablement of law fulfillment is detailed
Essays
397
in 8:5-8. The people who live according to the Spirit live out the goals of the
lawsubmission to the law, life, peace, please God. The great aspirations of
the Jewish peopleto experience Gods eschatological life in the present, to
experience wholeness in all relationships, to please and honor Godby submitting to the good and holy law of God are achieved by living in the Spirit.
Paul says the same thing in different words in 14:17the righteousness,
peace, and joy of the Kingdom of God, the goal of Jewish life and law observance, come from the Holy Spirit, not from observing Jewish food laws.
Fulfilling the law through living in the Spirit is contrasted with another way
of living. Those who live according to the flesh achieve none of these
goalsthey do not submit to the law, they live in a relationship of hostility to
God, and they are unable to please God. The law is fulfilled only through life
in the Spirit. The expression of that fulfillment is love of neighbor (13:8).
New Identity
The Spirit who liberates from Sin, who gives life, and who enables the fulfillment of the law gives followers of Jesus a new identity. They are adopted as
children of Godthey are sons of God (8:14), they receive the Spirit of sonship of the eschatological kingdom which overcomes the spirit of slavery of
the present evil age (8:15), they pray Jesus prayer of familial intimacy with
God, Abba Father (8:15), they experience the reality that they are children of
God (8:16), they become coheirs with Christ of Gods inheritance (8:17).
The hopes and dreams of the Jewish people are experienced by those who
live in the Spirit.
Divine Assistance and Future Hope
The Spirit who gives followers of Jesus a new identity assists them in the present by standing alongside to lighten the burden of weakness by facilitating
communication with God that is consistent with the divine will.
The Spirit offers eschatological hope. The future is bright for those who
live in the Spirit. They have the assurance that the Spirit will give life to their
dying bodies, just as Jesus was given new life in the resurrection from the
dead (8:11). The presence of the Spirit represents the first fruits, the guarantee, of the eschatological redemption of their bodies, that is, the resurrection from the dead (8:23). The new life of the Spirit now will be transformed
into eschatological life.
Conclusion
The presence of the Spirit defines those who are followers of Jesus. Disciples
of Jesus are people who live in the Spirit. The lives of believers are characterized by living in the Spirit. The believers faith response is the means of
appropriating the redemption in Messiah Jesus, of appropriating the revelation of the righteousness of God through Messiah Jesus. The Christian life in
Romans, however, is portrayed primarily as a life empowered by living in the
Spirit.
See Fee, 1994:472-634, for the most comprehensive study of the Spirit
in Paul, including Romans.
NATURAL THEOLOGY Romans 1:19-21 and 2:14-15 have been the classical center for arguing that Paul taught a natural theology (so especially
Roman Catholic theology and much mainline Protestant thought). The argument is that Pauls thought here reflects either dependence on or similarity to
Stoic natural theology as mediated through Hellenistic Judaism.
Stoicism was an ancient school of philosophy current with the early cen-
398
Essays
turies of the church. Stoic cosmology (origin and nature of the world) taught
that the creative and unifying principle of the world was a reality called one
of many different names: spirit (pneuma), reason (logos), nature (physis),
common law (nomos), god (theos). This reason or nature, often called a
natural law, is prior to creation and governs the universe. It may be discerned
by the careful observation of nature. The goal of human beings is to live in
conformity to nature or reason. This law of nature is eternal and
unchangeable. Justice is established by nature. The laws of human communities are valid to the degree they are in harmony with this natural law. Laws
are needed for human communities because most people do not participate
sufficiently in the reason to live in harmony with nature. Wise men (the
Stoics were very gender specific), however, are self-sufficient, because they
live in harmony with nature, and thus do not need local laws. Cosmology
and ethics are thus linked in a rigorous and closely reasoned ethical system.
A careful reading of Romans 1 and 2 indicates that Paul knows nothing
of Stoic natural theology. 1) Pauls focus is the judgment of God, not the
creation of the universe. 2) He does not have an independent doctrine of creation. Creation theology in Paul is a function of theology proper, talk about
God, and anthropology, talk about the creatureliness of humanity. 3) Paul
makes no reference to the order of the universe (dioikesis or taxis) as a base
for knowledge of God. Knowledge of God is not perceived as a problem, but
is presupposed as self-evident for everyone. 4) Paul does not argue that God
can be deduced from divine works, and, therefore, humanity should have
deduced God, the form of the argument in Hellenistic Judaism. Rather, he
asserts that humanity did know God. The problem is that human beings did
not give glory and thanks. 5) Paul does not argue that people naturally do the
will of God. The point of 2:14 is that the Gentiles do not have the law by
nature of their birth and cultural-religious inheritance, not that they naturally
do what the law requires. 6) The rhetoric in Romans is not philosophical
(especially metaphysical) speculation, but prophetic accusation. The purpose
is not to reason from below to above, but to assert the excuselessness of the
creature before the Creator. Paul is not seeking to explain a point of contact
with the divine, but to characterize God as powerful lord and humanity as in
revolt against the known lord. The focus on the power and lordship of God is
to emphasize the creatureliness of humanity. That creatureliness is evidence
of Gods lordship. As Guenther Bornkamm says so well, Paul does not infer
Gods being from the world, but . . . the being of the world from Gods revelation (1969:59). 7) Paul knows nothing of self-sufficient human beings.
All humans are creatures who worship a god or the God.
Natural theology is foreign to Paul. He knows only of revealed theology.
See Bornkamm, 1969:47-70; Ksemann, 1980:39-43; McKenzie,
1964.
OBEDIENCE Obedience is an important term in Romans. Its importance
exceeds its numerical occurrencethe noun (hypako) is used seven times
(out of 11 times in the letters of Paul and 15 times in the NT) while the verb
(hypakou) is used four times (out of 11 in the letters ascribed to Paul and 21
in the NT).
The word is a compound made up of the noun hear (ako) and the
preposition under (hypo). It literally means to hear under, that is, to
respond properly to hearing. Significantly, there is no word in Hebrew for
Essays
399
obey. The Septuagint translates the Hebrew Shema, hear, O Israel, the
Lord is our God, the Lord is one (Dt. 6:4) as obey, that is respond appropriately. To hear properly is intimately associated with the covenantlove the
Lord your God . . . keep the words I have commanded you . . . recite them
to your children.
Two things make obedience an important word in Romans. First, it
defines the purpose of the letter in 1:5 and 16:26 as the obedience of faith.
The letter is framed by this phrase. That framing is reinforced by another
onein 1:6 the faith of the Roman Christians is proclaimed in all the world
while in 16:19 it is the obedience of the same people that is known to all.
Faith and obedience are linked as equivalents in the frame of the letter.
This framing is significant also because Paul identifies the specific audience he has in mind when he speaks of the obedience of faiththe obedience of faith among all the Gentiles in behalf of his [Gods] name (1:5) and
to the obedience of the Gentiles in word and work (15:18). Paul is specifically concerned in Romans about the obedience of the Gentiles.
The second important thing about obedience in Romans is that it is a paradigmatic term, both in an eschatological and an ethical sense. The obedience of the one, that is Christ, reverses the disobedience of one man, that
is Adam (5:12-21). The obedience of Christ makes many righteous just as
Adams disobedience made many sinners. Disobedience and obedience effect
a cosmic and eschatological understanding of history. Disobedience introduces Sin, Death, and condemnation into the world. Obedience introduces
life, grace, justice, and righteousness. Obedience is understood apocalyptically; it effects the change of the ages.
Precisely because obedience is eschatologically paradigmatic, it also is paradigmatic for the ethics of the Roman Christians. Paul defines life in Romans
6 as obedience to the slavery of Sin or to the slavery of righteousness.
Everyone is conceived of as in slavery. Christians are people who were slaves
of Sin and thus obeyed it. Now, however, they are people who have been set
free from this slavery and become obedient to righteousness (6:16-18).
Obedience is also defined by its opposite in Romans. The problem of the
Jews in 10:16 and 21 is that they have not obeyed the gospel which they
heard. In 9:31-32 the problem was defined as not out of faith. Not trusting
and not hearing properly are synonyms.
The answer to all humans being bound together in disobedience is the
obedience of faith. The proper response to the end-time fulfillment of Gods
righteous salvation in Messiah Jesus is trusting and obeying. Faith expresses
itself in obedience and obedience is evidence of faith. To speak of faith is to
speak of obedience.
The linkage of faith and obedience in Romans underlines Pauls covenantal understanding of the Christian faith and church. Gentile Christians are
becoming part of Gods people and are expected to respond properly, that is,
become slaves of righteousness and obey the type of teaching they have
received (6:15-23).
See Miller, 2000; Nanos, 1996:218-37.
ORIGINAL SIN Romans 5:12 is the primary basis for the Christian doctrine
of original sin. The words original sin are not found in this text, or in the
Bible. They are a translation of the Latin peccatum originale, and stem from
the fourth century Christian theologian Augustine.
400
Essays
Essays
401
402
Essays
Essays
403
righteous but that by which God makes righteous the sinner. In terms of the
Reformation and post-Reformation debate, the righteousness of God is
Gods gift to humanity.
But at another level Augustine has an all-embracing understanding of
righteousness. It includes both the event of making righteous (brought about
by the operative grace of God) and the process of being made righteous
(brought about by the cooperative grace of God). Augustine does not distinguish these two aspects of Gods saving work, as the Reformation does. The
renewal of the divine image in making righteous amounts to a new creation.
Making humans righteous is inherent rather than imputed, again to use the
language of the sixteenth century. The Christian does not merely receive the
status of righteousness, but becomes a righteous person. Therefore, only the
Christian can act righteously. Pagans can perform good deeds, but neither
they are nor their actions are righteous. Thus Augustines ethics is closely
related to his doctrine of making righteous. And, similarly, his political theology is closely associated with his doctrine of righteousness. Only within the
city of God can one find true justice, which is synonymous with the right
ordering of human affairs according to the will of God. The context of the
concern is the city of God in the midst of the collapsing Roman Empire. The
question answered here is how to build a Christian social order in a collapsing world.
What is clear is that righteousness in the ancient world is fundamentally
concerned with the proper ordering of life and community. It concerns proper relationships in community. Righteousness is consistently ethical-politicalsocial language. Augustine, however, while sharing this larger ancient perspective also introduces a shift in his concern for the question of how human
beings become righteous before God.
The shift introduced by Augustine becomes a landslide with Martin Luther.
The basic meaning of righteousness becomes a legal (forensic) declaration that
a person has right status with God, or is acceptable before God. The righteousness of God describes Gods gift of right status to sinful human beings.
In other words, righteousness involves a change of status, not of being or
nature. To be made righteous is an act of God external to humanity. The alien
righteousness of Christ is imputed to men and women. It is an act of God
toward humanity, not an act of God within human beings. The wicked are not
made righteous, as in Augustine, but only proclaimed righteous. Furthermore,
righteousness is distinguished sharply from sanctification, the work of God
within human beings. The concern is personal acceptance before God. The
context is the Reformation preoccupation with God as the perfectly righteous
judge and the scrupulous conscience of the medieval penance system. There
is no salvation apart from the confession of and penance for all sins (conscious and unconscious). The means of making righteous is the divine declaration of right standing and the human act of faith. The question being
answered is how sinful human beings can find acceptance in the sight of God.
Luthers interpretation is a completely new development. It takes the
human centered half of Augustine, but not the ethical-political half. Luther
transforms social-political-ethical language into psychological-salvation language. Righteousness has nothing to do with relationships in the believing
community or with the ordering of the world. Being made righteous is something that happens to an individual believer when in faith he/she accepts
Christs atonement on the cross.
404
Essays
Essays
405
120; Dunn and Suggate, 1993; Hays, 1992:1129-33; Hill, 1967; McGrath,
1986; J. Reumann, 1982; Scullion and Reumann, 1992:724-73; Stendahl,
1976; Stuhlmacher, 1986; Ziesler, 1972; Wright, 1980:13-37.
THE RIGHTEOUSNESS OF GOD Eighty percent of the righteousness of
God phrases in Paul are found in Romans (1:17; 3:5, 21, 22, 25, 26; 10:3
[2x]). The other two occurrences are 2 Cor. 5:21; 9:9.
The critical issue is the meaning of the genitive, of God, in the phrase.
The genitive is the case of possession. There are three grammatical options
to its interpretation. 1) It can be an objective genitive; the genitive is the object
of the action implied by the noun. The righteousness of God means the righteousness which is acceptable in Gods sight. 2) It can be a genitive of author
or origin; the genitive describes the source of the action implied in the noun.
The righteousness of God is the righteousness which proceeds from God and
is bestowed on the believer as an alien righteousness. 3) It can be a subjective
genitive; the genitive describes the nature or character of the subject implied
in the noun. The righteousness of God is the righteousness which belongs to
God; it describes the character of God as the righteous God who is and acts
righteously in all relationships.
The first two options are so similar that they can be treated as one (an
increasingly common pattern in the literature dealing with this issue). The
interpretive options then are: 1) genitive of authorship, God gives righteousness. The focus is on the gift of righteousness to humanity. The concern is
the standing of the believer before God. The righteousness of God is the righteousness that comes from God to the believer. The believer receives an alien
righteousness that gives him/her right standing with God. Righteousness is
salvation seen in relation to human possibility. It answers the question, how
can I as an individual find a gracious God? Righteousness is understood as a
legal (forensic) term; it is not something a person has on his/her own, but
something he/she receives in the verdict of the law court. Faith becomes the
condition for the reception of righteousness. (So e.g., M. Luther, J. Calvin,
R. Bultmann, A. Nygren, C. E. B. Cranfield). 2) Subjective genitive, God is
righteous. The focus is Gods nature and activity. The concern is the character of God. Righteousness speaks of a saving God and of Gods saving activity. Gods righteousness is the power which brings salvation to pass. The gift
of righteousness which God gives partakes of the character of power. It is the
means by which God subordinates creation to divine lordship. It answers the
question, is God faithful to the promises to Israel? Righteousness is end-time
language that depicts God faithfully keeping promises by the exercise of sovereign power in the world. Faith is the product of the righteousness of God
(so Schlatter, Ksemann).
Luther interpreted the phrase as an objective genitive; it describes the gift
of right status with God. Literally, Luther translated the righteousness of God
as the righteousness which is acceptable before God. Luthers interpretation
dominated the understanding of the phrase and Romans until the early twentieth century. In 1900 Cremer challenged his interpretation and made the
case that the righteousness of God refers to the covenant faithfulness of God
(it is a subjective genitive). Cremer was followed in 1933 by A. Schlatter, who
argued that the phrase describes the nature of God (a subjective genitive), not
the legal gift of God (an objective genitive).
The critical turning point in interpretation came with Ksemann in 1961.
406
Essays
He argued not only that the phrase was a technical term in Jewish literature
that focused on Gods faithfulness to the covenant, but also that it pointed to
the redemptive activity of God, not human oriented gift. Second, Ksemann
made the case for the subjective genitive interpretation of the phrase (it
describes the nature of God). Third, he argued that the gift character of Gods
righteousness in Jewish intertestamental literature is tied to the power character of God. The righteousness of God involves a change of lordship and a
transformation of existence. It denotes Gods extension of divine lordship over
Gods people and the entire creation to transform and make right.
Ksemann with the help of his students has again shaped a new consensus about the meaning of the righteousness of God. That consensus may be
outlined as follows: 1) The OT concept of Gods saving activity on behalf of
Israel, seen in the context of Gods faithfulness, is the theological backdrop of
Pauls thinking on the righteousness of God. 2) The more immediate historical context of Pauls understanding is apocalyptic Judaism with its emphasis
on Gods righteousness as victory over all creation. 3) The genitive in the
phrase is a subjective genitive that describes the nature and activity of God.
4) The meaning of the righteousness of God in the pre-Pauline tradition was
determined by at least three different fields of meaning: a) the righteousness
of God denotes the sovereignty of God as Lord over creation; b) the world
(cosmos) is the forum for a judicial trial between God and Israel and/or the
world; c) the end-time judgment in which God will manifest faithfulness once
and for all is imminent. 5) Paul used the righteousness of God shaped by these
connotations, and transformed it with his Christ centered gospel. 6) The righteousness of God for Paul is the end-time redemptive activity of God that
renews and universalizes the covenant with Israel to include the entire creation. God acts redemptively in the Christ event on behalf of all humanity and
creation. 7) The judicial-legal connotations of the righteousness of God are
overshadowed by the lordship-eschatological meanings. The phrase asserts
that God is establishing divine Lordship over the creation. God is putting
humanity in the right, and thereby calling for life in obedience to divine lordship. In other words, the making righteous of human beings is more than simply a proclamation of right status; it is an effective declaration that places
people under Gods sovereign lordship and calls for their obedience to it.
This commentary understands the righteousness of God as a statement
about Gods nature and saving activity. That judgment is based on the following arguments. 1) The word cradle of the righteousness of God in vv. 16-18,
the first and key use of the phrase in Romans, is gospel, the power of God,
salvation, revelation, faithfulness, all words that describe Gods nature and
activity rather than gift. Furthermore, the two parallel phrases power of God
and wrath of God are statements about the nature of God (subjective genitives). 2) Paul never associates the righteousness of God with giving (didnai)
or receiving (lambanein) language. The righteousness of God is not a gift that
is received in Paul. This observation is especially clear when the righteousness
of God and righteousness are compared. The righteousness of God is
revealed, shown up, manifested, demonstrated, and can be known (1:17; 3:5,
21, 25; 10:3). What Paul says about the righteousness of God he does not
say about righteousness (ch. 4; 5:17, 21; 8:10; 9:30; 10:4, 10; 14:17), and
he does not say about righteousness what he says about the righteousness of
God. Righteousness is a gift of God, the righteousness of God describes the
activity of God. What is true of Paul is also true in prior Jewish literature. The
Essays
407
righteousness of God refers to Gods activity rather than gift (even Bultmann
admits this). 3) Paul does not explain the meaning of the term. We, therefore,
must assume that his readers were familiar with it from their scriptures, the
Jewish Bible (our OT). As we have seen, the righteousness of God in the OT
refers to Gods covenant and saving faithfulness to Israel in history and in the
eschatological future. 4) Whether the righteousness of God was a technical
term in apocalyptic Judaism, as Ksemann and students argued, may be disputed because the precise phrase does not occur that often. But the meaning
of Gods sovereign and victorious extension of divine lordship over all creation
is clear. Paul radicalized this understanding. The righteousness of God is Gods
sovereignty, Gods power in v. 16, over the world revealing itself in Jesus
Christ.
This understanding is confirmed by Pauls other uses of the phrase in
Romans and 2 Corinthians.
The phrase occurs in 3:1-8 in the context of several contrasts:
human unfaithfulness
the faithfulness of God
human untruth
God is true
human unrighteousness
the righteousness of God
my untruthfulness
the truth of God
The righteousness of God is paralleled with the faithfulness of God and the
truth of God. All three phrases describe the nature of God in contrast to
human nature. The righteousness of God is the faithful and true saving
power of God that overcomes human unfaithfulness, untruthfulness, and
unrighteousness.
Romans 3:21-26 offers the clearest exposition of the righteousness of
God in Paul. It is manifested through the faithfulness of Jesus . . . to prove
Gods righteousness . . . that God may be righteous and the one making
righteous (see the explanatory notes on 3:21-26). It is the saving activity of
God through Jesus Christ which demonstrates divine righteousness and the
capacity to make righteous human beings.
In 10:1-4 the Jews do not know the righteousness of God, because they
are seeking to establish their own righteousness rather than submit to the
righteousness of God. The righteousness of God contrasts with Jewish national pride; their own righteousness refers to an exclusive ethnic definition that
excludes other people. The righteousness of God has to describe the character
of God; the issue is submitting to someone, not receiving or rejecting a gift.
Christ is the one who makes righteousness available to everyone for salvation.
In 2 Corinthians 5:21 God made Christ sin so that believers could become
the righteousness of God in him. God is the subject who makes believers like
God. The righteousness of God describes Gods saving and powerful activity.
His righteousness in 2 Corinthians 9:9 clearly describes the character of
God. Psalm 111:9 is cited to assert that Gods righteousness remains forever.
A similar, but slightly different, phrase in Philippians 3:2-11 confirms the
preceding analysis. The righteousness from God (ek theou) is contrasted
with confidence in the flesh and righteousness that comes from the law. The
righteousness from God comes through the faith of Christ and is based on
faith. The righteousness that comes from God is a saving power that profoundly changes Paul.
For further reading, see Dunn, 1992b; Dunn and Suggate, 1993; Hays,
1992:1129-33, and 1983; Ksemann, 1969b:168-82; Reumann, 1982;
Soards, 1985 and 1991; Williams, 1980.
408
Essays
Essays
409
ple of impartiality in a new way, within or without the law. Verses 14 and 27
illustrate the without the law principle.
What Romans 2 makes clear is that judgment is according to works without respect of persons. Salvation or eternal life is granted to those who live
obediently in relation to the revelation they have received, whether within the
law or without the law. Pauls real point is that judgment does not depend on
whether one is within or without the people of the law. Both people will be
judged by God because both sin.
The affirmation of judgment according to works in Romans 2 is part of a
much larger biblical teaching that Protestants want to ignore. Judgment in the
Bible is not according to grace, or faith, or mercy. It is according to works
without respect of persons.
Does that mean Romans 2 teaches that people can be saved by works? It
does not say that. As the larger message of Romans makes exceedingly clear,
no human being can or will stand before God in his/her own righteousnessthat is what Jesus is all about. The whole point of Romans 1:182:11
is that God is judging humanity because men/women did not center their lives
in Gode.g., recognize, honor, glorify. Pauls concern here is not to offer a
definition of the gospel, but to undercut exclusive understandings of righteousness and Gods judgment.
Salvation in the Bibleboth testamentsis always Gods gracious gift; it
can never be earned. God owes no one salvation. God judges all people by
the evidence of their salvationby their works.
Paul in Romans 2 is a Jew, just as Jesus and James were. Judgment by
works does not contradict salvation by grace, but presupposes it. Salvation
and ethics are flip sides of the same coin for Paul, as they were for the Jews
and the other early Christians.
The teaching of Romans 2 regarding judgment by works is also consistent
with another pattern that may be discerned in the Pauline judgment texts.
As Nigel Watson has pointed out, they are consistently addressed to problems
of presumption and arrogance, puffed-upness, or to people living in a state
of illusion. They are designed to evoke repentance and obedience.
See Donaldson, 1990; Donfried, 1976; Garlington, 1991b; Sanders,
1977, and 1983a:123-35; Snodgrass, 1986; Watson, 1983; Yinger, 1999.
SIN IN ROMANS Sin is a very important word in Romans, and Romans is
very important for a Pauline understanding of sin. The key NT words for sin
are found in Romans, and found more often than in any other writing. The
major words for sin with their occurrence in Romans, Paul, and the NT are:
Term
Romans
Paul
NT
unrighteous (adikia)
7
12
25
sin (sing.) (hamartia)
48
64
173
lawless (anomia)
2
6
14
ungodly (asebia)
2
4
6
transgression (parabasis)
3
5
7
disobey (parako)
1
2
3
fall beside (paraptma)
9
16
19
Sin in Romans is unrighteous or unjust behavior, lawlessness, ungodliness,
breaking of a law, disobedience, falling beside or missing the mark. Sin concerns behavior, actions and attitudes by people. The description seems comprehensive. It also sounds very familiar; that is the way Christians have talked
410
Essays
about sin for centuries. But that understanding by itself misunderstands Paul.
His understanding of sin is much more profound. Paul talks about sin as Sin
(singular, hamartia), as a personified power that rules. He defines sin as Sin
primarily in Romans, 48 out of 64 occurrences. Furthermore, he concentrates this talk about Sin in chs. 58, 41 times (four times in chs. 14, one
time each in chs. 911 and 1216). Except for 7:5, all occurrences in chs.
58 are singular, Sin not sins.
Sin is a personal power. It has desires and passions (6:12; 7:5); it is
opportunistic (7:8, 11); it revives from sleep (7:9); it deceives (7:11); it dwells
in (7:17, 20, 23). As a personal power, it enters the world (5:12); it rules
(5:21; 6:12, 13, 14); it enslaves (6:6, 16, 17, 20; 7:14; 8:2); it works (7:17,
20); it has its own law (7:23-8:2). Paul interprets Sin as a cosmic power. The
categories of interpretation are apocalyptic theology.
Sin as cosmic, personal power is associated with the law (3:20; 5:13 [2x];
6:14; 7:5, 7 [2x], 8, 9, 11, 23, 25; 8:2); with death, either as producing
death (5:12 [2x], 21; 6:16, 23; 7:5, 8, 11, 13; 8:2, 10) or as something to
die to (6:2, 6, 7, 10, 11); with slavery (6:6, 17, 18, 22; 7:14, 23; 8:2); with
rulership (5:21; 6:12, 13, 14); with unrighteousness (6:13); with flesh (7:3).
Sin stands over against or is contrasted by grace (5:20, 21; 6:1, 14); life
(5:21; 6:10, 11, 13, 22, 23); righteousness (6:13, 16, 18, 20; 8:3, 10); obedience (6:16, 17); freedom (6:7, 18, 20, 22; 8:2); law (7:14); Gods son (8:7);
faith (14:23).
Sin as inherited depravity or tendency (Augustines misinterpretation of
5:12) or as sinful act/deed does not begin to tap the depth of Pauls interpretation of sin (see Original Sin essay). Sin is a cosmic power; it is a cosmic
magnetic field that pulls all human beings, except Jesus, and all creation into
its force field. Nothing is capable of bounding its power or freeing people or
creation from its pull, not even the gift of Gods revealed law. Sin is Cosmic
King in Paul. Sins kingship is total, with one exception (Jesus); no one and
nothing can escape its tyrannical rule.
Sin was present in the cosmos before Adam. It is prior to acts of sin,
either Adams or his descendants. Sin exists and rules even when there is no
system to define it; when it cannot be counted or tracked. Adam turned Sin
loose in the world. His role is critical. He is the trigger mechanism or the
enabler of Sin, but not its origin or cause. His fateful legacy is that he let Sin
enter the world. Adam is thus the remote cause of death. But, he is not the
immediate cause of all dying; all sin personally, all are pulled into the magnetic field of Sin by submitting to its rule as evidenced in sinful choices and
actions.
Given this theology of Sin, Paul can say two things that seem contradictory but are not. First, all human beings are under the rule of Sin (Rom. 3:9).
Second, not all sinful acts are transgressions; only those actions which violate
a command or teaching of God constitute transgression or missing the mark.
But people who are not guilty of transgressions, who have not violated the
direct teaching of God because they do not have such a teaching, are still
under the rule of Sin because they submit to Sin.
If Christians wish to use the traditional language of sin, original sin, the
theology must be redefined by Pauls explicit theology of Sin. Original sin
refers to Sin as power that exists prior to and independent of any human sinful act, and that pulls all human beings, except one (Jesus), and all creation
into its force field. Such a doctrine of original sin must be balanced by an
Essays
411
412
Essays
composed of all human beings is first ruled by one king who is conquered by
another king who becomes the ruler of all the people. A change of lordships
takes place by a unilateral action of God. Human beings have no choice; they
are transferred from Adams people to Christs people, from the lordship of
Sin and Death to the lordship of Grace and Life. Verse 18 says it most
clearly: just as through one trespass there is condemnation for all human
beings, so also through one righteous act there is righteousness of life for all
human beings. Every statement between vv. 15 and 18 affirms that whatever humanity lost in Adam it much more regained in Christ.
Sin and Death are universal. SalvationGrace and Lifeis universal,
determined by one person for all other human beings and for the entire cosmos. That is clearly the dominant message of Romans 5:12-21.
There is a minor theme in the text unithuman responsibility. The universality of sin is qualified in v. 12 by because all sinned. The universality of
salvation is qualified in v. 17 by a participle, the ones receiving (hoi lambanontes). But the theme is a minor one, not major. That is why theologians
have struggled so much about the relationship of Adams sin and human
responsibility in the interpretation of v. 12. The same issue applies to the relationship of Jesus righteous act and human responsibility in vv. 15-19.
Romans 5:12-21, taken by itself, stresses universal salvation as the
answer to universal Sin. That is the clear and plain meaning of the text.
The critical phrase is taken by itself. Romans 5 presents one image of
sin and one image of salvation. Sin is defined as Sin, as cosmic lord who pulls
all people and all creation into its magnetic field. Salvation must always
answer the problem of Sin. There are many different metaphors for salvation
in the NT because sin is many different realities. Whatever the human predicament, whatever the nature of sins expression, salvation must answer and correct it. Images of sin as broken relationships, or eneminess, or lost community are answered by righteousness, reconciliation, election, or adoption, not by
the victory of Christ over Sin. But Sin as the powerful cosmic Lord requires
an even more powerful cosmic lord to triumph over it and its child Death.
Humans play no part in this drama because they are only slaves of a lord.
Universal Sin requires universal salvation, an evil cosmic lord must be
dethroned by an even more powerful cosmic lord, or talk about healing broken relationships, or reconciling enemies, or incorporating people into a family are only bandages on a totally dysfunctional world made up of totally dysfunctional communities filled with totally dysfunctional individuals. The government of the world has to be changedSin and Death have to be replaced
by Grace and Lifeso that sins can be corrected by appropriate salvific solutions.
Other texts make the minor theme here the major theme; they emphasize
that humans are responsible to respond to the victory of Christ over Sin. One
just has to think of the trust (faith) and obedience texts which assert that
trust in Christ is a condition for salvation [Essay: Faith]. Paul also speaks
often of those who are perishing or who face the wrath of God because
of their rejection of God (Rom. 1:18-32; 2:7-8, 12-16; 6:23; 1 Cor. 1:18;
6:9; 8:11; 2 Cor. 2:15; 4:3; Phil. 1:28; 3:19; 2 Thess. 1:8-9). These texts
make it clear that trust in Christ is essential for salvation, and that apart
from Christ everyone will be condemned. Or, think of Romans 911; Paul
genuinely worries that Gods people Israel may be lost.
The difference between the two sets of textuniversal or unlimited salva-
Essays
413
414
Action
one is justified
we might be justified
Gal. 2:16 no flesh be justified
Rom. 3:20 no flesh be justified
Essays
But by
the faith of Christ
the faith of Christ
Gods truth/righteousness
Gods truth/righteousness
(based on Ps. 143:2)
Rom. 3:28 one is justified
apart from works of law faithfulness
Gal. 3:2
you received the Spirit out of works of law
hearing of faithfulness
Gal. 3:5
God supplies the Spirit out of works of law
hearing of faithfulness
Gal. 3:10 under a curse
those out of works of law
Gal. 2:16
Not
out of works of law
out of works of law
out of works of law
out of works of law
Five texts concern being made righteous (two with the use of Ps. 143:2),
two the reception of the Spirit, one a curse. People are made righteous by
divine actionthe faithfulness of Christ, the truth, righteousness, and faithfulness of God (the faithfulness probably refers to Gods or Christs faithfulness
given the prior and subsequent references)not works of the law. People
receive the Spirit through the hearing or obedience of faithfulness, not through
works of the law. Those who rely on works of the law are under a curse that
is so powerful it requires an act of God through Christ to liberate people.
There is no consensus about the meaning of this data. Four basic interpretive views have been proposed. The most popular interpretation in the history of the church is that works of law refer to the attempt of human beings
to establish their own righteousness by meritorious deeds (so Luther, Calvin,
Sanday and Headlam, Burton, Barrett, Bruce, Bultmann, Ksemann,
Cranfield, Morris, Fung). Works of law are often equated with legalism in this
interpretation. Second, works of law refers to actions performed in obedience
to the law, to works which are commanded by the law (so Fuller, Cosgrove,
Kaye). The third view argues that works of law refer to nomistic service, service of the law (so especially Loymeyer, Tyson). Fourth, works of law signify
distinctions between Jews and Gentiles, or the boundary markers which separate Jews from Gentiles (so Sanders, 1983a; Dunn, 1990a, 1990b, 1992c;
Watson, 1983; Campbell, 1992a.).
E. P. Sanders has demonstrated that the first view is based on a faulty
understanding of Judaism. Judaism and early Christianity were agreed that
salvation comes from Gods activity and is based on Gods grace; it is not
earned by any human effort or meritorious work.
The fact that the term appears exclusively in two letters of Paul suggests
that its meaning can be determined only by the usage in these letters. Later
theological interpretations of the phrase, e.g., works of law denote meritorious works designed to earn salvation, are not relevant and/or useful in understanding Pauls intention.
Pauline usage of the phrase favors the fourth interpretationworks of law
refer to covenantal nomism (E. P. Sanders phrase for the basic theology of
Judaism), to the Jewish conviction that status within the covenant is maintained by doing what the law requires. The specific laws of the covenant that
became identity markers of Jewish identity during and following the
Maccabean revolution (167 B.C.) were circumcision, food, and sabbath laws
(cf. 1 Macc. 1:60-63). These specific laws became the test cases for Jews and
non-Jews of faithfulness to the covenant. Both this theology and the specific
identity markers served to separate Jews from Gentiles in Jewish and Gentile
self-understanding in the first century.
Essays
415
Pauls first use of works of law occurs in Galatians 2:16. The context is
an argument about the need for Gentile Christians to practice circumcision
(the false brothers) and to observe Jewish food laws (the representatives of
James and Jewish Christians in Antioch) in order to be members of the
covenant people God was creating in the world through Messiah Jesus. Do
Gentile converts have to become Jewsto adopt and practice the critical
identity markers of Jewish identityto be Christians? The issue in ch. 3 is
identical. Did Gentile converts receive the Spirit by becoming Jewsby
accepting circumcision and practicing Jewish dietary lawsor by the direct
action of God? Pauls answer is that Gentile Christians are made righteous
and receive the Spirit by the saving activity of God independent of Jewish ethnic identity.
The context for Pauls use of works of law in Romans is the universality
of Gods judgment and salvation over against a Jewish theology of superiority and exclusiveness. The first reference in Romans is in the closing argument
that the Jews are equally under Gods judgment as the Gentiles. The law itself
is cited to demonstrate that the Jews are accountable to God, that no human
being is made righteous by being Jewish. The second referencethe variant
wording of 3:27asserts that the revelation of the end-time righteousness of
God in Jesus Christ excludes boasting that God is the God primarily, or even
only, of the Jewsa reference back to Jewish boasting in God and the law in
2:17f. The third reference, immediately after in v. 28 and just before the affirmation that God is the God of all people, states that a human being is made
righteous only by faithfulness, probably a reference to the faithfulness of
Christ in vv. 22-26, not by works of the law, not by being a member of the
Jewish covenant community.
Works of law in Galatians and Romans describe a theology and a selfunderstanding that differentiates the Jewish people from Gentiles. The critical
symbols of the differentiation are circumcision and food laws, although the
symbols point beyond themselves to the observance of the law as the means
of covenant faithfulness. CircumcisionRomans 2and dietary
lawsRomans 1415are issues in the Roman churches that create tension
between Jewish and Gentile Christians, because they differentiate the two
peoples.
Such an understanding of works of law is consistent with the use of the
parallel phrase in Qumran. They reflect the understanding of the covenant
which distinguished the Qumran covenanters from fellow Jews.
Paul rejects works of law as defining marks of Christian identity. Gentiles
do not have to become Jews to be Christian. Why? Because all people are
made righteous by the saving righteousness of God in and through Messiah
Jesus.
See Abegg, 1999 and 2001; Cranfield, 1991; Dunn, 1988, 1:153-160;
1990b; 1992c; 1997b; Gaston, 1987:100-6; Harrington, 1997:109-28;
Kapera, 1991; H. B. P. Mijoga, 1999; Moo, 1983; Schreiner, 1991b;
Wright, 1998.
WRATH Wrath, used 10 times in Romans (1:18; 2:5, 8; 3:5; 4:15; 5:9;
9:22; 12:19; 13:4, 5), comes from the OT and apocalyptic Jewish literature.
The wrath of God describes Gods action against those who offend in the
covenant relationship (Deut. 28:15-68; 32:19-20). In other words, the wrath
of God, like the righteousness of God, is a relational term. The wrathful action
416
Essays
of God is personal, moral, and rational. It is Gods reaction to sin, particularly idolatry. It is transitory in nature, operating in individual acts of punishment.
Gods love and righteousness are permanent; Gods wrath represents a
change in attitude caused by inappropriate behavior by the covenant partner
(Isa. 54:7, 8).
This understanding of Gods wrath is associated with end-times in the later
OT writings (e.g., Zeph. 1:18; Dan. 8:19) and in the intertestamental literature. It is associated with the coming Day of the Lord, a day of judgment and
vengeance (Isa. 2:10-22; Jer. 30; Joel 3:12), where the wrath of God
becomes inescapable end-time doom. It is a permanent reality rather than a
transitory one. The wrath of God became a technical term for the end-time
power of God which operates as an aspect of divine justice to punish the
wicked. It refers to corporate and cosmic judgment, not only to individual
judgment. The wrath of God describes the end-time power of divine judgment
on all forms of sin, especially sins in which human beings act as if they are
Lord (see Jub. 5:6; 36:10; 1 En. 5:6f.; 84:4; 92:9; 103:7f.). This wrath is
poured out primarily on the Gentiles and apostate Jews in apocalyptic literature (1 En. 91:79; 2:9). God shows forbearance by holding back wrath in the
present (Jub. 5:6). The wrath of God in Jewish literature is primarily a future
reality.
Outline of Romans
Introduction
A. Prescript
1. The author
2. The addressees
3. The greetings
B. The thanksgiving
1. The thanksgiving
2. An oath
3. A prayer sigh
4. The reasons
C. The disclosure formula
1. The formula
2. The obligation
3. The desire
D. The thesis (proposition)
1. The thesis
2. The explanation
a. The Gospel reveals the righteousness
of God
b. The Gospel reveals the wrath of God
1:1-15
1:1-7
1:1-6
1:7a
1:7b
1:8-12
1:8
1:9
1:10
1:11-12
1:13-15
1:13
1:14
1:15
1:16-18
1:16
1:17-18
The Argument
A. The revelation of the wrath of God
1. The impartial judgment of God on all peoples
a. The thesis
b. The elaboration
1) the inexcusability of humanity
2) the just retribution of God
1:1815:13
1:183:20
1:182:11
1:18
1:192:10
1:19-21
1:222:3
417
1:17
1:18
418
Outline of Romans
2:4-5
2:6-10
2:6
2:7-10
2:7
2:8
2:9
2:10
2:11
2:12-29
2:12-13
2:14-27
2:14-16
2:17-24
2:25
2:26-27
2:28-29
3:1-20
3:1-9
3:10-18
3:19-20
3:2111:36
3:21-26
3:21-22a
3:22b-25a
3:25b-26
3:274:25
3:274:2
4:3-25
4:3
4:4-8
4:9-21
4:22
4:23-25
Outline of Romans
419
5:18:39
5:1-11
5:1a
5:1b-8
5:9a
5:9b-11
5:12-21
5:12-14
5:15-21
6:17:6
6:1
6:15
7:1
8:12-39
8:12-17
8:18-30
8:31-39
9:6-29
9:6a
9:6-13
9:14-21
9:22-29
420
Outline of Romans
9:3010:21
9:3010:3
10:4-13
10:14-21
11:1-32
11:1-10
11:11-24
11:25-32
11:33-36
12:115:33
12:1a
12:1b2
12:3-16
12:3
12:4-8
12:9-15
12:16
12:1713:10
13:11-14
14.15:13
14:1-12
15:7-13
15:14-29
15:30-32
CONCLUSION
Peace Greeting
Letter of Recommendation for Phoebe
First Greeting List
Final Exhortations
Grace Benediction
Final Greetings
Doxology
15:3316:27
15:33
16:1-2
16:3-16
16:17-20a
16:20b
16:21-23
16:25-27
421
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abbreviations
ANRW
AsJT
ATR
AusBR
BJRL
BR
BT
BTB
CBQ
ETL
EvQ
ExpTim
HBT
HTR
IBS
Int
JBL
JES
JETS
JSNT
JTS
LS
MQR
NovT
NTS
RefTR
SJT
ST
TrinJ
TynBul
TZ
WTJ
ZNW
Bibliography
Only the primary works used in this commentary are included in the
bibliography. More comprehensive bibliographies can be found in
Brendan Byrnes commentary on Romans (Sacra Pagina, Liturgical
Press, 1996), and in Joseph Fitzmyers, Romans (Anchor Bible,
Doubleday, 1993).
Aageson, J. W.
1986 Scripture and Structure in the Development of the Argument in
Romans 9-11. CBQ 48:265-89.
Abegg, Martin G.
1999 4QMMT C 27, 31 and Works of Righteousness. Dead Sea
Discoveries 6:139-47.
2001 4QMMT, Paul, and Works of the Law. In The Bible at
Qumran. Text, Shape and Interpretation, ed. Peter W. Flint,
203-16. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Achtemeier, P. J.
1985 Romans. Atlanta: John Knox Press.
Applebaum, S.
1974 The Organization of the Jewish Communities in the Diaspora.
In The Jewish People in the First Century, vol. 1, Compendia
Rerum Judaicarum ad Novum Testamentum, ed. S. Safrai, M.
Stern, and Van Gorcum. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 464-503.
Aune, David E.
1987 The New Testament and Its Literary Environment. Philadephia:
Westminster.
Badenas, R.
1985 Christ the End of the Law. Sheffield, UK: JOST Press.
Bailey, L. R.
1979 Biblical Perspectives on Death. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
423
424
Bibliography
Bibliography
425
426
Bibliography
Bibliography
427
428
Bibliography
the New Testament, ed. Joel Marcus and Marion L. Soards, 16990. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press.
De Brun, T. S.
1988 Pelagiuss Interpretation of Rom. 5:12-21, Toronto Journal of
Theology 4:30-43.
Dillon, Richard J.
1998 The Spirit as Taskmaster and Troublemaker in Romans 8. CBQ
60:682-702.
Dodd, Brian
1995 Romans 1:17A Crux Interpretum for the Pistis Christou
Debate. JBL 114:470-73.
1999 Pauls Paradigmatic I. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press.
Dodd, C. H.
1932 The Epistle of Paul to the Romans. London: Hodder and
Stoughton.
Donaldson, T. L.
1990 Proselytes or Righteous Gentiles? The Status of Gentiles in
Eschatological Pilgrimage of Thought. Journal for the Study of
Pseudepigrapha, 7:3-27.
1993 Riches for the Gentiles (Rom. 11:12): Israels Rejection and
Pauls Gentile Mission. JBL 112:81-98.
1997 Paul and the Gentiles. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
Donfried, Karl P., ed.
1976 Justification and Last Judgment in Paul. ZNW 67:90-110.
1991 The Romans Debate. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrikson.
Donfried, Karl P., and Peter Richardson, eds.
1998 Judaism and Christianity in First-Century Rome. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans.
Doughty, D. J.
1973-74 The Priority of XARIS. NTS 19:163-80.
Dunn, James D. G.
1973 JesusFlesh and Spirit: An Exposition of Romans 1:3-4. JTS
24:40-68.
1975 Rom. 7:14-25 in the Theology of Paul. TZ 31:257-73.
1982 Salvation Proclaimed VI. Romans 6:1-11: Dead and Alive.
ExpTim, 93:259-64.
1983 The New Perspective on Paul. BJRL 65:95-112.
1985 Works of the Law and the Curse of the Law (Galatians 3:1014). NTS 31:523-42. Reprinted in Jesus, Paul and the Law,
215-41 (see 1990a below).
1986 Romans 13:1-7A Charter for Political Quietism? Ex Auditu,
2:55-68.
1987 Righteousness from the Law and Righteousness from Faith:
Pauls Interpretation of Scripture in Romans 10:1-10. In
Tradition and Interpretation in the New Testament, ed. G. F.
Hawthrone and O. Betz, 216-28. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
1988 Romans. 2 vols. Dallas: Word Books.
1990a Jesus, Paul and the Law. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox.
1992a The Body of Christ in Paul. In Worship, Theology and
Ministry in the Early Church, ed. M. J. Wilkins and T. Paige,
146-62. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press.
Bibliography
429
430
Bibliography
1993 Faith and Polemic: The New Testament and First Century
Judaism. In Anti-Semitism and Early Christianity, ed. Craig A.
Evans and Donald A. Hagner, 1-17. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
1999 Paul and the Prophets: Prophetic Criticism in the Epistle to the
Romans. In Romans and the People of God, ed. Sven K.
Soderlund and N. T. Wright, 115-38. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Eskola, Timo
1998 Theodicy and Predestination in Pauline Soteriology. Tbingen:
Mohr Siebeck.
Fee, Gordon
1994 Christology and Pneumatology in Romans 8:9-11and
Elsewhere: Some Reflections on Paul as a Trinitarian. In Jesus of
Nazareth: Lord and Christ, ed. J. B. Green and M. Turner, 31231. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
1995 Gods Empowering Presence. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson.
Finger, Reta Halteman
1993 Paul and the Roman House Churches. Scottdale, Pa.: Herald
Press.
Fitzmyer, Joseph A.
1979 The Gospel in the Theology of Paul. Int 33:339-50.
1981 To Advance the Gospel. Crossroad.
1993 Romans. Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday.
1993 The Consecutive Meaning of Ep Ho in Romans 5:12. NTS
39:321-39.
Friedmann, Robert
1952 Peter Riedemann on Original Sin and the Way of Redemption.
MQR 26:210-15.
1959 Original Sin. In Mennonite Encyclopedia, 4:79-82. Scottdale,
Pa.: Herald Press.
1973 The Theology of Anabaptism. Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press.
1994 The Doctrine of Original Sin as Held by the Anabaptists of the
Sixteenth Century. In Essays in Anabaptist Theology, ed.
H. Wayne Pipkin, 147-56. Elkhart, Ind.: Institute of Mennonite
Studies.
Friedrich, J., W. Poehlmann, and P. Stuhlmacher
1976 Zur historischen Situation und Intention von Roem. 13:1-7.
Zeitschrift fr Theologie und Kirche 73:131-66.
Fiorenza, Elisabeth Schuessler
1986 Missionaries, Apostles, Coworkers: Romans 16 and the
Reconstruction of Womens Early Christian History. Word and
World 6:420-33.
Fryer, N. S. L.
1981 Reconciliation in Pauls Epistle to the Romans.
Neotestamentica 15:34-68.
Fung, R. Y. K.
1988 The Epistle to Galatians. Grand Rapids, Eerdmans.
Funk, R. W.
1967 The Apostolic Parousia: Form and Significance. In Christian
History and Interpretation, ed. W. R. Farmer, C. F. D. Moule,
R. R. Niebhur, 249-68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bibliography
431
Gagnon, Robert A. J.
1998 The Meaning of HUPON TO AGATHON in Romans 14:16.
JBL 117:675-89.
2001 The Bible and Homosexual Practice. Nashville: Abingdon
Gamble, H.
1977 The Textual History of the Letter to the Romans. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans.
Garlington, Don B.
1990 The Obedience of Faith in the Letter to the Romans. WTJ
52:201-24.
1991 The Obedience of Faith. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck.
1991 The Obedience of Faith in the Letter to the Romans. WTJ
53:47-72.
1994 Faith, Obedience and Perserverance. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Gaston, Lloyd
1980 Abraham and the Righteousness of God. HBT 2:39-68.
1982 Israels Enemies in Pauline Theology. NTS 28:400-23.
Reprinted in Paul and the Torah, 80-99 (see 1987 below).
1987 Paul and the Torah. Vancouver, BC: University of British
Columbia Press.
1998 Faith in Romans 12 in the Light of the Common Life of the
Roman Church. In Common Life in the Early Church, ed. Julian
V. Hills, et al., 258-64. Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press International.
Gathercole, Simon J.
2002 Where Is Boasting? Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Geddert, Timothy J.
2001 Mark. Scottdale: Herald Press.
Georgi, Dieter
1991 Theocracy. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
1997 God Turned Upside Down. In Paul and Empire, ed. Richard A.
Horsley, 148-57. Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press International.
Getty, M. A.
1988 Paul and the Salvation of Israel: A Perspective on Romans
911. CBQ 50:456-69.
Gillman, F. A.
1983 Romans 6:5a: United to a Death Like Christs. ETL 59:267-302.
1987 Another Look at Romans 8.3: In the Likeness of Sinful Flesh,
CBQ 49:597-604.
Given, Mark D.
1999 Restoring the Inheritance in Romans 11:1. JBL 118:89-96.
Gorday, P.
1983 Principles of Patristic Exegesis. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen.
Gorman, Michael J.
2001 Cruciformity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Green, Joel B. and Baker, Mark, D.
2000 Recovering the Scandal of the Cross. Downers Grove, Ill.:
InterVarsity.
Greer, Rowan
1995 Sinned We All in Adams Fall. In The Social World of the First
Christians, ed. L. Michael White and O. Larry Yarbrough, 38294. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
432
Bibliography
Grieb, A. Katherine
2002 The Story of Romans. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press.
Guenther, W.
1978 Sin. In Dictionary of New Testament Theology, 3:573-87.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan.
Guerra, A. J.
1988 Romans 4 as Apologetic Theology. HTR 81:251-70.
1990 Romans: Pauls Purpose and Audience with Special Attention to
Romans 9-11. Revue Biblique 97:219-37.
Hafemann, Scott
1988 The Salvation of Israel in Romans 11:25-32. A Response to
Krister Stendahl. Ex Auditu 4:38-58.
Harder, Leland, trans. and ed.
1985 The Sources of Swiss Anabaptism. Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press.
Harrington, Hannah K.
1997 Holiness in the Laws of 4QMMT. In Legal Texts and Legal
Issues, ed. Moshe Bernstein, Florentino G. Martinez, and John
Kampen, 109-28. Leiden: Brill.
Harrison, J. R.
1999 Paul, Eschatology and the Augustan Age of Grace. TynBul
50:79-91.
Harrisville, R. A.
1994 PISTIS CHRISTOU: Witness of the Fathers. NovT 36:233-41.
Hay, David M.
1989 Pistis as Ground for Faith in Hellenized Judaism and Paul.JBL
108:461-76.
1995 Pauline Theology, vol. 3. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
Hays, Richard B.
1980 Psalm 143 and the Logic of Romans 3. JBL 99:107-15.
1983 The Faith of Jesus Christ. Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press.
1985 Have We Found Abraham to Be Our Forefather According to the
Flesh? A Reconsideration of Romans 4:1. NovT 27:76-98.
1986 Relations Natural and Unnatural: A Response to John Boswells
Exegesis of Romans 1. Journal of Religious Ethics, 14:184-215.
1989a Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul. New Haven, Conn.:
Yale University Press.
1989b The Righteous One as Eschatological Deliverer: A Case Study
in Pauls Apocalyptic Hermeneutic. In Apocalyptic and the New
Testament, ed. Joel Marcus and Marion L. Soards, 191-215.
Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press.
1991 Awaiting the Redemption of Our Bodies. Sojourners 20:17-20.
1992 Justification. In Anchor Bible Dictionary, 3:1129-33. New
York: Doubleday.
1993 Christ Prays the Psalms: Pauls Use of an Early Christian
Exegetical Convention. In The Future of Christology, ed.
Abraham J. Malherbe and Wayne A. Meeks, 122-36.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
1996 The Moral Vision of the New Testament. San Francisco: Harper.
1997 PISTIS and Pauline Christology: What Is at Stake? In Pauline
Christology, ed. D. M. Hay and E. E. Johnson, 4:35-60. Atlanta:
Scholars Press.
Bibliography
433
2001 Three Dramatic Roles: The Law in Romans 3-4. In Paul and
the Mosaic Law, ed. James D. G. Dunn, 151-64. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans.
2002 The Faith of Jesus Christ. Revised ed. (with Hayss and Dunns
SBL Exchange on the Faith of/in Jesus issue). Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans.
Heil, John Paul
2001 Christ, the Termination of the Law (Romans 9:30-10:8). CBQ
63:484-98.
Hill, David
1967 Greek Words and Hebrew Meanings. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Hofius, Otfried
1990 All Israel will be Saved: Divine Salvation and Israels Deliverance
in Romans 9-11. Princeton Seminary Bulletin 11:19-39.
2001 The Adam-Christ Antithesis and the Law. In Paul and the
Mosaic Law, ed. James D. G. Dunn, 165-205. Grand Rapids:
Eerdmans.
Hooker, M. D.
1959 Adam in Romans 1. NTS 6:297-306.
1971 Interchange in Christ. JTS 22:349-61.
1977 Interchange and Atonement. BJRL 60:462-81.
1989 Pistis Christou. NTS 35:321-42.
1990 From Adam to Christ. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hooker, M. D., and S. G. Wilson, eds.
1982 Paul and Paulinism. London: SPCK.
Horsley, Richard A.
1997 Paul and Empire. Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity International Press.
2000 Paul and Politics. Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity International Press.
Howard, George
1967 On the Faith of Christ, HTR 60:459-65.
1969 Christ the End of the Law: The Meaning of Romans 10:4f. JBL
88:331-37.
1970 Romans 3:21-31 and the Inclusion of the Gentiles. HTR
63:223-33.
1973-74 The Faith of Christ. ExpTim 85:212-15.
Hbner, Hans
1984 Law in Pauls Thought. Edinburgh: T &. T Clark.
2001 Hermeneutics of Romans 7. In Paul and the Mosaic Law, ed.
James D. G. Dunn, 207-14. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Hultgren, Arland J.
1985 Pauls Gospel and Mission. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
Humphrey, Edith M.
1999 Why Bring the Word Down? The Rhetoric Demonstration and
Disclosure in Romans 9:3010:21. In Romans and the People
of God, ed. Sven K. Soderlund and N. T. Wright, 129-48. Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans.
Hurtado, Larry, W.
1981 The Doxology at the End of Romans. In New Testament
Textual Criticism, ed. Eldon Jay Epp and Gordon Fee, 185-200.
New York: Clarendon Press.
434
Bibliography
Bibliography
435
Ksemann, Ernst
1969 New Testament Questions of Today. London: SCM Press.
1980 Commentary on Romans. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Kapera, Zdzislaw J.
1991 Qumran Cave IV and MMT. Krakow, Poland: Enigma Press.
Karlberg, Mark W.
1986 Israels History Personified: Romans 7:7-13 in Relation to Pauls
Teaching on the Old Man. TrinJ 7:65-74.
Karris, Robert J.
1991 Romans 14:115:13 and the Occasion of Romans. In The Romans
Debate, ed. K. P. Donfried, 65-84. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson.
Kaylor, R. D.
1988 Pauls Covenant Community. Atlanta: John Knox.
Keck, L. E.
1969 New Testament Views of Death. In Perspectives on Death, ed.
L. O. Mills, 33-98. Abingdon.
1977 The Function of Rom. 3:10-18. In Gods Christ and His
People, ed. J. Jervell and W. A. Meeks, 141-57. Oslo, Norway:
Universitets-forlaget.
1980 The Law and The Law of Sin and Death (Rom. 8:1-4):
Reflections on the Spirit and Ethics in Paul. In The Divine
Helmsman, ed. J. L. Crenshaw and S. Sandmel, 41-57. New
York: KTAV Publishing House.
1986 Romans 1:18-23. Int. 40:402-6.
1989 Jesus in Romans. JBL 108:443-60.
1990a Christology, Soteriology, and the Praise of God (Romans 15:713). In The Conversation Continues, ed. R. T. Fortna and B. R.
Gaventa, 85-97. Nashville: Abingdon.
1990b Romans 15:4An Interpolation? In Faith and History, ed. J. T.
Carroll, C. H. Cosgove, E. J. Johnson, 125-36. Atlanta: Scholars
Press.
1995 What Makes Romans Tick? In Pauline Theology, ed. D. M.
Hay and E. E. Johnson, 3:3-29. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
1997 Searchable Judgments and Scrutable Ways: A Response to Paul
J. Achtemeier. In Pauline Theology, ed. E. E. Johnson and
D. M. Hay, 4:22-32. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
Kennedy, George A.
1984 New Testament Interpretation Through Rhetorical Criticism.
Chapel Hill, N.C.: University of North Carolina Press.
Kertelge, K.
1991 The Sin of Adam in Light of Christs Redemptive Act According
to Romans 5:12-21. Communio 18:502-13.
Kinneavy, James L.
1987 Greek Rhetorical Origins of Christian Faith. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Kirby, J. T.
1987 The Syntax of Romans 5.12: A Rhetorical Approach. NTS
33:283-86.
Klaassen, Walter, Frank Friesen, and Werner Packull, trans. and eds.
2001 Sources of South German/Austrian Anabaptism. Pandora,
Ohio: Pandora Press.
436
Bibliography
Klassen, William
1962 Coals of Fire: Sign of Repentance or Revenge? NTS 9:337-50.
1998 Pursue Peace: A Concrete Ethical Mandate (Romans 12:1821). In Ja und Nein, ed. Klaus Wengst and Gerhard Sass, 195207. Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag.
Klassen, William, and Walter Klaassen, trans. and eds.
1978 The Writings of Pilgram Marpeck. Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press.
Klein, Guenther
1991 Pauls Purpose in Writing the Epistle to the Romans. In The
Romans Debate, ed. K. P. Donfried, 29-43. Peabody, Mass.:
Hendrickson.
Knox, John
1964 Romans 15:14-33 and Pauls Conception of His Apostolic
Mission. JBL 83:1-11.
Koontz, Gale Gerber
1989 The Liberation of Atonement. MQR 64:171-92.
Kraftchick, Steve
1987 Pauls Use of Creation Themes: A Test of Romans 18. Ex
Auditu 3:72-87.
Kraus, C. Norman
1987 Jesus Christ Our Lord. Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press.
Kreitzer, Larry
1989 Adam as Analogy: Help or Hindrance? New Blackfriars
70:278-84.
1989 Christ and Second Adam in Paul. Communion Viatorum
32:55-101.
1991 The Sin of Adam in Light of Christs Redemptive Act According
to Romans 5:12-21. Communio 18:502-13.
Laato, T.
1995 Paul and Judaism. Atlanta: Scholars Press.
Lambrecht, J.
1974 Man Before and Without Christ: Rom. 7 and Pauline
Anthropology. LS 5:18-33.
1984 Why Is Boasting Excluded? A Note on Rom. 3:27 and 4:2. ETL
61:364-69.
1990 The Groaning of Creation: A Study of Rom. 8:18-30. LS 15:318.
1992 The Wretched I and Its Liberation. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
2000 Syntactical and Logical Remarks on Romans 15:8-9a. NovT
42:257-61.
Lambrecht, J., and R. W. Thomson
1989 Justification by Faith. Wilmington, Del.: Michael Glazier.
Lampe, Peter
1991 The Roman Christians of Romans 16. In The Romans Debate,
ed. K. P. Donfried, 216-30. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson.
1992 Family in Church and Society in New Testament Times.
Affirmation 5:1-20.
2003 From Paul to Valentinus. Minneapolis: Fortress.
Lane, William
1998 Social Perspectives on Roman Christianity during the Formative
Years from Nero to Nerva: Romans, Hebrews, 1 Clement. In
Bibliography
437
438
Bibliography
Bibliography
439
440
Bibliography
Bibliography
441
1996b Meals, Food, and Table Fellowship. In The Social Sciences and
New Testament Interpretation, ed. Richard Rohrbaugh, 159-82.
Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson.
Nolland, John
1981 Uncircumcised Proselytes. Journal for the Study of Judaism
12:173-94.
Nygren, A.
1949 Commentary on Romans. Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press.
OBrian, P.
1974 Thanksgiving and the Gospel in Paul. NTS 21:144-55.
ORourke, John J.
1973 Pistis in Romans, CBQ, 35:188-94.
Osiek, Carolyn
1987 Women in House Churches. In Common Life in the Early
Church, ed. Julian V. Hills, et al., 300-15. Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity
Press International.
Pedersen, Sigfred
2002 Pauls Understanding of the Biblical Law. NovT 44:1-34.
Peristiany, J. D., ed.
1965 Honor and Shame. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson.
Petersen, Norman R.
1990 On the Ending(s) to Pauls Letter to Rome. In The Future of
Early Christianity, ed. B. A. Pearson, 337-47. Minneapolis:
Fortress Press.
Peterson, Anders Klostergaard
1998 Shedding New Light on Pauls Understanding of Baptism: a
Ritual Theoretical Approach to Romans 6. ST 52:3-28.
Pilgrim, Walter E.
1999 Uneasy Neighbors: Church and State in the New Testament.
Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press.
Piper, John
1980 The Demonstration of the Righteousness of God in Romans
3:25,26. JSNT 7:2-32.
1980 The Righteousness of God in Romans 3:1-8. TZ 36:3-16.
1983 The Justification of God. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Pipkin, Wayne, and John H. Yoder, trans. and eds.
1989 Balthasar Hubmaier. Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press.
Pitt-Rivers, Julian
1968 Honor. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, ed.
D. L. Sills, 6:503-11, New York: Macmillan.
Porter, Calvin L.
1994 Romans 1:18-32: Its Role in the Developing Argument. NTS
40:210-28.
Porter, Stanley, E.
1991 The Argument of Romans 5: Can a Rhetorical Question Make a
Difference. JBL 110:655-77.
Pryor, John W.
1983 Pauls Use of IesousA Clue for the Translation of Romans
3:26? Colloquium 16:31-45.
Punt, N.
1980 Unconditional Good News. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
442
Bibliography
Quarles, Charles L.
2003 From Faith to Faith: A Fresh Examination of the Prepositional
Series in Romans 1:17. NovT 45:1-21.
Risnen, Heikki
1983 Paul and the Law. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck.
1988 Paul, God, and Israel: Romans 911 in Recent Recearch. In
The Social World of Formative Judaism and Christianity, ed.
J. Neusner, et al., 178-206. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
1992 Jesus, Paul and the Torah. Sheffield, UK: JSOT Press.
Reasoner, Mark
1995 The Theology of Romans 12:115:13. In Pauline Theology,
ed. D. M. Hay and E. E. Johnson, 3:287-99. Fortress Press.
1999 The Strong and the Weak. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Reid, Marty L.
1996 Augustinian and Pauline Rhetoric in Romans Five. Lewiston,
NY: Mellen Biblical Press.
Reumann, John
1982 Righteousness in the New Testament. Philadelphia: Fortress
Press.
Rhyne, C. Thomas
1985 Nomos Dikaiosynes and the Meaning of Romans 10:4. CBQ
47:486-99.
Richardson, Peter
1969 Israel in the Apostolic Church. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
1986 From Apostles to Virgins: Romans 16 and the Roles of Women
in the Early Church. Toronto Journal of Theology 2:232-61.
1998 Augustus-Era Synagogues in Rome. In Judaism and
Christianity in First Century Rome, ed. K. P. Donfried and Peter
Richardson, 17-29. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Richardson, Peter, and Stephen Westerholm
1991 Law in Religious Communities in the Roman World. Wilfrid
Laurier University Press.
Roberts, J. J. M.
1987 Yahwehs Foundation in Zion (Isa. 28:16). JBL 106:27-45.
Roetzel, Calvin J.
1997 No Race of Israel in Paul. Putting Body and Soul Together,
ed. V. Wiles, A. Brown, and G. F. Snyder, 230-44. Valley Forge,
Pa.: Trinity Press International.
Romaniuk, K.
1991 Was Phoebe in Romans 16:1 a Deaconess? ZNW 81:132-34.
Rondet, Henri
1972 Original Sin: The Patristic and Theological Background. New
York: Alba House.
Rutgers, Leonard V.
1998 Romans Policy Toward the Jews: Expulsions from the City of
Rome during the First Century C.E. In Judaism and Christianity
in First-Century Rome, ed. K. P. Donfried and P. Richardson, 93116. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Bibliography
443
Sabourin, L.
1981 Original Sin Again. Religious Study Bulletin 4:88-101.
Sampley, J. Paul
1995a Different Light: A Response to Robert Jewett. In Pauline
Theology, ed. D. M. Hay and E. E. Johnson, 3:109-29.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
1995b The Weak and the Strong: Pauls Careful and Crafty Rhetorical
Strategy in Romans 14:115:13. In The Social World of the
First Christians, ed. L. Michael White and O. Larry Yarborough,
40-52. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Sanday, W., and A. C. Headlam
1902 A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the
Romans. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.
Sanders, E. P.
1977 Paul and Palestinian Judaism. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
1978 Pauls Attitude Toward the Jewish People. Union Seminary
Quarterly Review 33:175-91.
1983a Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People. Philadelphia: Fortress
Press.
1983b Romans 7 and the Purpose of the Law. Proceedings of the
Irish Biblical Association 7:44-59.
1985 Jesus and Judaism. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
Schiffmann, L. H.
1981 At the Crossroads: Tannaitic Perspectives on the JewishChristian Schism. Jewish and Christian Self-Definition, ed.
E. P. Sanders, 2:115-56. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
Schlatter, A.
1995 Romans. Trans. S. S. Schatzmann. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson.
Schmid, H. H.
1968 Gerechtigkeit as Weltordnung. Tbingen: J. C. B. Mohr.
Schottroff, Luise
1992 Give to Caesar What Belongs to Caesar and to God What
Belongs to God: A Theological Response of the Early Christian
Church to Its Social and Political Environment. In The Love of
Enemy and Nonretaliation in the New Testament, ed. Willard
Swartley, 223-57. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press.
Schnabel, E. M.
1985 Law and Wisdom from Ben Sira to Paul. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Schreiner, Thomas R.
1983 The Church as the New Israel and the Future of Ethnic Israel in
Paul. Studia Biblical et Theologica 13-14:17-38.
1991a Israels Failure to Attain Righteousness in Romans 9:3010:3.
TrinJ 12:209-20.
1991b Works of Law in Paul. NovT 33:215-44.
1993a Does Romans 9 Teach Individual Election unto Salvation? Some
Exegetical and Theological Reflections. JETS 36:25-40.
1993b The Law and Its Fulfilment. Grand Rapids: Baker.
1998 Romans. Grand Rapids: Baker.
Schulz, Ray R.
1990 A Case for President Phoebe in Romans 16:2. Lutheran
Theological Journal 24:124-27.
444
Bibliography
Scott, J. M.
1992 Adoptions as Sons of God. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Scroggs, R.
1966 The Last Adam. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
1983 The New Testament and Homosexuality. Minneapolis: Fortress
Press.
Scullion J. J., and John Reumann
1992 Righteousness. Anchor Bible Dictionary, 5:724-73. New York:
Doubleday.
Segal, A. F.
1987 The Sacrifice of Isaac in Early Judaism and Christianity. In The
Other Judaisms of Late Antiquity, 107-30. Atlanta: Scholars
Press.
1990a Paul the Convert. New Haven, Conn.: Yale.
1990b Pauls Experience and Romans 9-11. Princeton Seminary
Bulletin 11:56-70.
Seifrid, Mark A.
1985 Pauls Approach to the Old Testament in Rom. 10:6-8. TrinJ
6:3-37.
1992a Justification by Faith. Leiden: Brill.
1992b The Subject of Romans 7:14-25. NovT 34:313-33.
2000a Christ Our Righteousness. Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity
Press.
2000b The New Perspective on Paul and Its Problems. Themelios
25:5-18.
Seow, Choon-Leong, ed.
1996 Homosexuality and Christian Community. Louisville:
Westminster John Knox Press.
Shillington, George
1998 2 Corinthians. Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press.
Shogren, Gary S.
2000 Is the Kingdom of God about Eating and Drinking or Isnt It?
(Romans 14:17). NovT 42:238-56.
2000 The Wretched Man of Romans 7:14-25 as Reductio ad absurdum. EvQ 72:119-34.
Siker, Jeffrey S.
1989 From Gentile Inclusion to Jewish Exclusion: Abraham in Early
Christian Controversy with Jews. BTB 19:30-36.
1991 Disinheriting the Jews. Louisville: Westminster.
Silberman, Lou H.
1990 Pauls Midrash: Reflections on Romans 4. In Faith and History,
ed. J. T. Carroll, C. H. Cosgrove, and E. J. Johnson, 99-104.
Atlanta: Scholars Press.
Smallwood, E. M.
1976 The Jews Under Roman Rule. Leiden: Brill.
Smiga, George
1991 Romans 12:1-2 and 15:30-32 and the Occasion of the Letter to
the Romans. CBQ 53:257-73.
Smith, D. M.
Bibliography
445
446
Bibliography
Bibliography
447
448
Bibliography
Watson, N. M.
1983 Justified by Faith; Judged by WorksAn Antinomy? NTS
29:209-21.
Watts, Rikki E.
1999 For I Am Not Ashamed of the Gospel: Romans 1:16-17 and
Habakkuk 2:4. In Romans and the People of God, ed. Sven K.
Soderlund and N. T. Wright, 3-25. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Weaver, D.
1983 From Paul to Augustine: Romans 5:12 in Early Christian
Exegesis. St. Vladimirs Theological Quarterly 27:187-206.
1985 The Exegesis of Romans 5:12 among the Greek Fathers and Its
Implications for the Doctrine of Original Sin: the 5th12th
Centuries. St. Vladimirs Theological Quarterly 29:113-59,
231-57.
Webster, Alexander F. C.
1981 St. Pauls Political Advice to the Haughty Gentile Christians in
Rome: An Exegesis of Romans 13:1-7. St. Vladimir Seminary
Quarterly 25:259-82.
Wedderburn, A. J. M.
1971 The Body of Christ and Related Concepts in 1 Corinthians. SJT
24:74-96.
1973 The Theological Structure of Romans V.12. NTS 19:332-54.
1980 Adam in Pauls Letter to the Romans. In Studia Biblica 1978,
ed. E. A. Livingstone, 413-30. Sheffield, UK: JSOT Press.
1983 Hellenistic Christian Traditions in Romans 6. NTS 29:337-55.
1985 Some Observations on Pauls Use of the Phrases in Christ and
with Christ. JSNT 25:83-97.
1987 Baptism and Resurrection. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck.
1987 The Soteriology of the Mysteries and Pauline Baptismal
Theology. NovT 29:53-72.
1989 The Reasons for Romans. Minneapolis: T & T Clark.
1991 Purpose and Occasion of Romans Again. In The Romans
Debate, ed. K. P. Donfried, 195-202. Peabody, Mass.:
Hendrickson.
Weima, Jeffrey A. D.
1994a Preaching the Gospel in Rome: A Study of the Epistolary
Framework of Romans. In Gospel in Paul, ed. L. Ann Jervis and
P. Richardson, 337-66. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press.
1994b Neglected Endings. Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Academic Press.
Weingart, Richard
1994 The Meaning of Sin in the Theology of Menno Simons. In
Essays in Anabaptist Theology, ed. H. Wayne Pipkin, 157-74.
Elkhart, Ind.: Institute of Mennonite Studies.
Wenger, John C., trans. and ed.
1955 The Complete Writings of Menno Simons. Scottdale, Pa.:
Herald Press.
Westerholm, S.
1988 Israels Law and the Churchs Faith. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
2001 Paul and the Law in Romans 9-11. In Paul and the Mosaic
Law, ed. James D. G. Dunn, 215-37. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans.
Bibliography
449
White, J. L.
1971 Introductory Formulae in the Body of the Pauline Letter. JBL
90:91-97.
1972 The Body of the Greek Letter. Missoula: Society of Biblical
Literature.
1984 New Testament Epistolary Literature in the Framework of
Ancient Epistolography. ANRW II 25.2:1730-56.
Whitsett, Christopher G.
2000 Son of God, Seed of David: Pauls Messianic Exegesis in Romans
2:3-4. JBL 119:661-81.
Wiefel, Wolfgang
1991 The Jewish Community in Ancient Rome and the Origins of
Roman Christianity. In The Romans Debate, ed. K. P. Donfried,
85-101. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson.
Wilckens, Ulrich
1974a Roemer 13.1-7. In Rechtfertigung als Freiheit, 203-45.
Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener.
1974b Ueber Abfassunszweck und Aufbau des Roemerbriefes. In
Rechtfertigung als Freiheit, 110-70. Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener.
Williams, S. K.
1975 Jesus Death as Saving Event. Missoula: Scholars Press.
1980 The Righteousness of God in Romans. JBL 99:241-90.
1987 Again Pistis Christou. CBQ 49:431-47.
Wilson, W. T.
1991 Love Without Pretense. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck.
Winger, M.
1992 By What Law? Atlanta: Scholars Press.
Wink, Walter
1984 Naming the Powers: The Language of Power in the New
Testament. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
1986 Unmasking the Powers: The Invisible Powers That Determine
Human Existence. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.
1992 Engaging the Powers: Discernment and Resistance in a World
of Domination. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
Wink, Walter, ed.
1999 Homosexuality and Christian Faith. Minneapolis: Fortress
Press.
Witherington, Ben
1994 Pauls Narrative Thought World. Westminster John Knox Press.
Wright, N. Tom
1978 The Paul of History and the Apostle of Faith. TynBul 29:61-88.
1979 Towards a Biblical View of Universalism. Themelios 4:54-58.
1980 Justification: The Biblical Basis and its Relevance for
Contemporary Evangelicalism. In The Great Acquital, ed.
G. Reid, 13-37, 109-19. London: Fount Paperbacks.
1983 Adam in Pauline Christology. In Society of Biblical Literature
Seminar Papers, 1983, ed. Kent H. Richard, 359-89. Chico,
Calif.: Scholars Press.
1990 The New Testament and the State. Themelios 16:11-17.
1991 The Climax of the Covenant. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.
450
Bibliography
Bibliography
451
1987 The Just Requirement of the Law (Romans 8.4). AusBR 35:7782.
1988 The Role of the Tenth Commandment in Romans 7. JSNT
33:41-56.
1989 Pauls Letter to the Romans. Harrisburg, Pa.: Trinity Press
International.
Zijpp, N. van der
1959 Original Sin. In Mennonite Encyclopedia, 4:79-83. Scottdale,
Pa.: Herald Press.
Zorn, W. D.
1998 The Messianic Use of Habakkuk 2:4 in Romans. StoneCampbell Journal 1:213-30.
9:16 . . . . . . . . . .248
11:3 . . . . . . . . . .382
12:19 . . . . . . . . .253
12:36 . . . . . . . . .382
15:6 . . . . . . . . . . .52
15:13 . . . . . . . . . .52
16 . . . . . . . . . . .242
20:1-17 . . . . . . .269
20:2 . . . . . . . . . .378
20:13-17 . . . . . .319
20:17 . . . . . . . . .197
23:4-5 . . . . . . . .320
24 . . . . . . . . . . .242
32:32 . . . . . . . . .241
33:19 . . . . . . . . .247
33:20 . . . . . . . . . .69
40 . . . . . . . . . . .242
Deuteronomy
3:24 . . . . . . . . . . .52
4:12 . . . . . . . . . . .69
5:17-21 . . . . . . .319
5:21 . . . . . . . . . .197
5:6-21 . . . . . . . .269
6:4 . . . . . . . . . . .399
6:4-5 . . . . . . . . . .81
7:9 . . . . . . . . . . .226
8:2-5 . . . . . . . . .138
8:17 . . . . . . . . . .264
9:4 . . . . . . . . . . .264
9:26 . . . . . . . . . . .52
9:29 . . . . . . . . . . .52
10:17 . . . . . . . . . .75
14:1 . . . . . . . . . .220
28 . . . . . . . . . . . .68
28:15-68 . . . . . .415
29 . . . . . . . . . . .270
Leviticus
9 . . . . . . . . . . .242 29:4 . . . . . . . . . .276
11 . . . . . . . . . . .345 30 . . .263, 265, 270,
271, 272, 293
18 . . . . . . .269, 271
18:2 . . . . . . . . . .269 30:6 . . . . . . . . . .270
18:4 . . . . . . . . . .269 30:11-14 . .263, 269,
270
18:5 . .263, 269, 270
19:18 . . . .319, 320, 30:12 . . . . . . . . .263
321 30:13 . . . . . . . . .263
30:14 . . . . .263, 264
30:15 . . . . . . . . .211
Numbers
6:22-27 . . . . . . .137 30:15-20 . . . . . .219
14 . . . . . . . . . . .242 32 . . . . . . . . . . .268
19:13 . . . . . . . . .253 32:5-6 . . . . . . . .220
25:10-13 . . . . . .261 32:6 . . . . . . . . . .249
32:19 . . . . . . . . .268
452
Job
15:8 . . . . . . . . . .285
29:14 . . . . . . . . .328
33:23-26 . . . . . .225
34:11 . . . . . . . . .408
34:19 . . . . . . . . . .75
41:11 . . . . . . . . .285
Judges
5:1 . . . . . . . . . . .401
6:13 . . . . . . . . . .275
Psalms
1 . . . . . . . . . . .202
2:7 . . . . . . . . . . . .39
2:9 . . . . . . . . . . .249
2:11 . . . . . . . . . .280
5:10 . . . . . . . .68, 92
7:9 . . . . . . . . . . .225
9:4 . . . . . . . . . . .401
9:8 . . . . . . . . . . .401
9:8-21 . . . . . . . .408
10:7 . . . . . . . .68, 92
13:2 . . . . . . . . . . .44
14:1-3 . . . . . .68, 92
17:3 . . . . . . . . . .225
18:49 . . . . . . . . .342
19:4 . . . . . . . . . .268
23 . . . . . . . . . . .228
25:6 . . . . . . . . . .298
26:2 . . . . . . . . . .225
32:1-2 . . . .115, 121
33:4 . . . . . . . .95, 96
34:14 . . . . . . . . .361
35:2 . . . . . . . .68, 92
35:17 . . . . . . . . . .44
35:27 . . . . . . . . .137
36:22 . . . . . . . . .305
37:9 . . . . . . . . . .408
37:37 . . . . . . . . .408
40:9 . . . . . . . . . . .47
40:11 . . . . . . . . .298
42:2 . . . . . . . . . . .44
44:9 . . . . . . . . . .275
44:21 . . . . . . . . .225
44:22 . . . . . . . . .229
44:23 . . . . . . . . .275
50 . . . . . . . . . . .401
50:6 . . . . . . .68, 401
51 . . . . . . . . .59, 90
51:1 . . . . . . . . . .298
51:4 . . . . . . . . . . .90
53:2-4 . . . . . . . . .92
55:18-19 . . . . . .137
56 . . . . . . . . . . .228
1 Samuel
12:7 . . . . . . . . . .401
12:22 . . . . . . . . .275
16:7 . . . . . . . . . .225
31:9 . . . . . . . . . . .47
2 Samuel
5:1 . . . . . . . . . . . .39
7 . . . . . . . . . . . .39
7:14 . . . . . .232, 233
24:14 . . . . . . . . .298
1 Kings
8:39 . . .
19:10 . .
19:14 . .
19:18 . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.225
.275
.275
.275
2 Kings
19:30-31 . . . . . .275
23:27 . . . . . . . . .275
1 Chronicles
21:13 . . . . . . . . .298
2 Chronicles
19:7 . . . . . . . . . . .75
28:8-15 . . . . . . .320
Ezra
9:5-15 . . . .196, 197
9:6-15 . . . . . . . . .59
Nehemiah
9:6-31 . . . . . . . .196
9:9-37 . . . . . . . . .59
9:29 . . . . . . . . . .270
453
58:12 . . . . . . . . .408
60:1 . . . . . . . . . .275
60:10 . . . . . . . . .275
62:10 . . . . . . . . .408
62:12 . . . . . . . . . .73
62:13 . . . . . . . . .408
69:9 . . . . . .339, 340
69:22-23 . . . . . .276
72 . . . . . . . . . . .401
72:1-4 . . . . . . . .402
72:3 . . . . . .137, 401
72:7 . . . . . .401, 402
74:1 . . . . . . . . . .275
78:60 . . . . . . . . .275
78:67 . . . . . . . . .275
79:6 . . . . . . . . . .138
82:1-4 . . . . . . . . .75
85:10 . . . . .137, 401
89:1 . . . . . . . . . . .96
89:2 . . . . . . . . . . .96
89:5 . . . . . . . . . . .96
89:8 . . . . . . . . . . .96
89:14 . . . . . . . . . .96
89:24 . . . . . . . . . .96
89:33 . . . . . . . . . .96
89:49 . . . . . . . . . .96
93:1 . . . . . . . . . .328
94:14 . . . . . . . . .275
96 . . . . . . . . . . .401
96:2 . . . . . . . . . . .47
96:10 . . . . . . . . .408
96:13 . . . .401, 402,
408
97 . . . . . . . . . . . .59
98 . . . . . . . .59, 401
98:2-3 . . . . . . . . .95
98:3 . . . . . . . . . . .96
98:9 . . . . . . . . . . .95
99 . . . . . . . . . . . .59
106 . . . . . . .68, 196
106:8 . . . . . . . . . .42
106:20 . . . . . . . . .71
108:11 . . . . . . . .275
111:9 . . . . . . . . .407
115:2 . . . . . . . . . .68
116:11 . . . . . . . . .90
117:1 . . . . . . . . .342
117:2 . . . . . . . . .342
118 . . . . . . . . . .228
119 . . . . . .202, 215
132:16 . . . . . . . .328
454
132:9 . . . . . . . . .328
139:1-2 . . . . . . .225
139:4 . . . . . . .68, 92
139:23 . . . . . . . .225
142:2 . . . . . . . . .270
143 . . . . . . .95, 401
143:2 . .68, 93, 380,
381, 414
145:20 . . . . . . . .226
Proverbs
1:7 . . . . . . . . . . .280
1:15 . . . . . . . . . .361
3:7 . . . . . . .280, 361
3:11-12 . . . . . . .138
3:33 . . . . . . . . . .305
8:15 . . . . . . . . . .314
8:15-16 . . . . . . .321
10:16 . . . . . . . . .408
20:22 . . . . . . . . .320
24:12 . . . . . .73, 408
24:21-22 . . . . . .321
25:21-22 . . . . . .312
30:10 . . . . . . . . .305
31:25 . . . . . . . . .328
Ecclesiastes
7:20 . . . . . . . . . . .92
12:14 . . . . . . . . .408
Isaiah
1:2-4 . . . . . . . . .220
1:9 . . . . . . .243, 251
1:21 . . . . . . . . . . .97
2:1-4 . . . . . . . . .253
2:3 . . . . . . . . . . .355
2:9 . . . . . . . . . . . .97
2:10-22 . . . . . . .416
3:10-11 . . . . . . .408
4:4 . . . . . . . . . . .283
5:16 . . . . . . . . . .401
6:10 . . . . . . . . . .328
8:14 . . . . . . . . . .260
9:6-7 . . . . . . . . .137
9:7 . . . . . . .137, 402
10:12 . . . . . . . . .286
10:22 . . . . . . . . .275
10:22-23 . . .244, 251
11 . . . . . . .142, 275
11:1-2 . . . . . . . .402
11:1-5 . . . . . . . .342
.235
.402
.223
.342
.275
.275
.286
.286
.286
.282
.286
.261
265,
266
29:1-8 . . . . . . . .286
29:10 . . . . . . . . .276
29:16 . . . . .248, 249
30:9 . . . . . . . . . .220
30:9-11 . . . . . . . .97
32 . . . . . . . . . . .142
32:15 . . . . . . . . .138
32:17 . . . . . . . . .137
33:1-35 . . . . . . .286
34:16 . . . . . . . . .139
37:31 . . . . . . . . .275
40 . . . . . . . . . . .228
40-66 . . .47, 59, 401
40:9 . . . . . . .47, 267
40:13 . . . . . . . . .285
41:2-4 . . . . . . . .314
41:2-28 . . . . . . .286
41:14 . . . . . . . . .105
41:25 . . . . . . . . .249
43:1 . . . . . . . . . .249
43:7 . . . . . . . . . .249
43:19-21 . . . . . .223
44:2 . . . . . . . . . .249
44:3 . . . . . . . . . .139
44:21 . . . . . . . . .249
44:24 . . . . . . . . .249
45:1-7 . . . . . . . .314
45:9 . . . . . . . . . .249
45:23 . . . . . . . . .336
48:17-22 . . . . . .137
48:18 . . . . .137, 401
49:1-13 . . . . . . .286
49:5 . . . . . .249, 253
49:8 . . . . . . . . . .249
51:4 . . . . . . . . . .253
51:7 . . . . . . . . . .269
51:9 . . . . . . . . . .328
52:5 . . . . . . . . . . .84
52:7 . . .47, 48, 267,
268
52:15 . . . . . . . . .353
53 . . . . . . . . . . .124
53:1 . . . . . .267, 269
53:5-6 . . . . . . . .241
53:10-11 . . . . . .402
53:10-12 . . . . . . .56
53:11 . . . . . . . . .249
54 . . . . . . . . . . .142
54:1 . . . . . . . . . .286
54:7 . . . . . . . . . .416
54:8 . . . . . . . . . .416
54:10 . . . . . . . . .137
55:5 . . . . . . . . . .286
55:8-9 . . . . . . . .285
55:12-13 . . . . . .223
56:3-8 . . . . . . . .286
57:3-5 . . . . . . . . .97
58:2 . . . . . . . . . .401
59 . . . . . . .142, 286
59:7-8 . . . . . . . . .92
59:12 . . . . . . . . .286
59:18 . . . . . . . . .408
59:20 . . . . . . . . .282
59:20-21 . . . . . .282
59:21 . . . . . . . . .282
60:5 . . . . . . . . . .355
60:17 . . . . .137, 401
61 . . . . . . . . . . .142
61:1 . . . . . . .48, 268
61:2 . . . . . . . . . .268
63:5-12 . . . . . . .197
63:7 . . . . . . . . . .286
63:8 . . . . . . . . . .220
63:15 . . . . .105, 298
64:10-12 . . . . . .105
Jeremiah
1:5 . . . . . . . . . . . .38
2 . . . . . . . . . . . .68
2:11 . . . . . . . . . . .71
3:6 . . . . . . . . . . . .97
3:22-25 . . . . . . .197
7:25-26 . . . . . . . .97
7:29 . . . . . . . . . .275
8 . . . . . . . . . . .142
9:22 . . . . . . . . . .144
9:26 . . . . . . . . . . .97
10:19-20 . . . . . .196
455
Daniel
1:3-16 . . . . . . . .334
2:21 . . . . . . . . . .322
4:17 . . . . . .314, 322
4:25 . . . . . . . . . .322
4:32 . . . . . . . . . .322
5:21 . . . . . . . . . .322
7:21-22 . . . . . . .224
7:25-27 . . . . . . .224
8:19 . . . . . . . . . .416
9:4-18 . . . . . . . . .59
9:4-19 . . . . . . . .196
10:3 . . . . . . . . . .334
12:1-3 . . . . . . . .224
Hosea
1:10 . .220, 244, 251
1:2 . . . . . . . . . . . .97
2:1 . . . . . . . . . . .251
2:18 . . . . . . . . . .223
2:20 . . . . . . . . . . .95
2:23 . . . . . . . . . .244
2:25 . . . . . . . . . .251
4:9 . . . . . . . . . . .408
9:17 . . . . . . . . . .275
11:1 . . . . . . . . . .220
14:6 . . . . . . . . . .279
Joel
2:28-29
2:28-32
3:5 . . . .
3:12 . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.138
.139
.266
.416
Micah
2:12 . .
4:4 . . .
4:5 . . .
4:7 . . .
5:7-8 .
6:5 . . .
7:7-10
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.275
.355
.137
.275
.275
.401
.196
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Habakkuk
2 . . . . . . . . . . . .56
2:4 . . .55, 57, 61, 96,
106, 131, 377
Zephaniah
1:18 . . . . . . . . . .416
Haggai
2:9 . . . . . . . . . . .137
Zechariah
8:12 . .137, 223, 275
Malachi
1:2-3 . . . . . . . . .246
1:11 . . . . . . . . . . .42
4:2 . . . . . . . . . . .402
APOCRYPHA
Baruch
1:15 . . . . . .196, 197
3:29-30 . . . . . . .271
3:8 . . . . . . .196, 197
4:21 . . . . . . . . . .286
5:9 . . . . . . . . . . .286
2 Baruch
13:8 . . . . . . . . . 408
25:2-3 . . . . . . . .224
27:1-15 . . . . . . .224
29:1-8 . . . . . . . .223
44:4 . . . . . . . . . .408
48:30-41 . . . . . .224
54:21 . . . . . . . . .408
70:2-10 . . . . . . .224
85:15 . . . . . . . . .408
Ecclesiasticus/Sirach
1:10 . . . . . . . . . .226
1:11-14 . . . . . . .280
2:1-5 . . . . . . . . .138
2:15 . . . . . . . . . .226
2:16 . . . . . . . . . .226
4:17-18 . . . . . . .138
10:4 . . . . . . . . . .314
17:17 . . . . .314, 322
18:13-14 . . . . . .138
21:26-7 . . . . . . .305
23:1-3 . . . . . . . .138
31:9 . . . . . . . . . .227
33:12 . . . . . . . . .305
33:13 . . . . . . . . .249
36:17 . . . . . . . . .220
37:1-17 . . . . . . .286
42:18 . . . . . . . . .225
43:31 . . . . . . . . . .69
44:20 . . . . . . . . .118
456
45:23-24
47:13 . . .
47:22 . . .
48:2 . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.261
.137
.342
.261
Judith
9:4 . . . . . . . . . . .261
12:2 . . . . . . . . . .334
12:7 . . . . . . . . . .336
1 Macabees
1:47 . . . . . .
1:60-63 . . .
1:62 . . . . . .
1:62-63 . . .
2:19-26 . . .
2:52 . . . . . .
2:54 . . . . . .
2:58 . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.337
.414
.337
.334
.261
.118
.261
.261
2 Macabees
1:2-4 . . . . .
6:12-16 . . .
6:14 . . . . . .
7 .......
7:30-38 . . .
7:32-33 . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.137
.138
.105
.142
.104
.138
3 Macabees
6:28 . . . . . . . . . .220
4 Macabees
2:6 . . . . . . .
6:27-29 . . .
17 . . . . . . .
17:20-22 . .
17:22 . . . . .
18:12 . . . . .
Tobit
1:10-12
3:1-6 . .
12:15 . .
13:12 . .
13:14 . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Wisdom of
1:6 . . . . . .
3:1-6 . . . .
6:3 . . . . . .
6:3-4 . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.198
.104
.142
.104
.241
.261
.334
.197
.225
.226
.226
Solomon
. . . . .225
. . . . .138
. . . . .314
. . . . .322
11:9-10 . . . . . . .138
11:15 . . . . . . . . . .71
12:7 . . . . . . . . . .220
12:21 . . . . . . . . .220
13-14 . . . . . . . . . .71
13:1-5 . . . . . . . . .71
13:5 . . . . . . . . . . .69
13:6-9 . . . . . . . . .71
14:12-14 . . . . . . .71
14:23-27 . . . . . . .71
14:26 . . . . . . . . . .71
14:27 . . . . . . . . . .71
16:10 . . . . . . . . .220
16:21 . . . . . . . . .220
16:26 . . . . . . . . .220
18:13 . . . . . . . . .220
19:6 . . . . . . . . . .220
PSEUDEPIGRAPHA
Assumption of
Moses
10:1-10 . . . . .
10:3 . . . . . . . .
10:4 . . . . . . . .
12:10 . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.286
.220
.220
.408
1 Enoch
1:7-9 . . . . . . . . .408
1:8-9 . . . . . . . . .246
2:9 . . . . . . . . . . .416
5:5-9 . . . . . . . . .408
5:6 . . . . . . . . . . .416
5:7 . . . . . . . . . . .137
5:9 . . . . . . . . . . .137
9:3 . . . . . . . . . . .225
10:17 . . . . . . . . .137
11:2 . . . . . . . . . .137
15:2 . . . . . . . . . .225
16:2 . . . . . . . . . .408
25:4 . . . . . . . . . .408
38:2 . . . . . . . . . . .55
41:2 . . . . . . . . . .408
41:9 . . . . . . . . . .408
45:4-5 . . . . . . . .223
50:1-4 . . . . . . . .408
51:4-5 . . . . . . . .223
53:6 . . . . . . . . . . .55
60:6 . . . . . . . . . .408
62:2 . . . . . . . . . .408
62:4 . . . . . . . . . .224
62:11 . . . . . . . . .220
62:14 . . . . . . . . . .59
63:8 . . . . . . . . . .408
84:4 . . . . . . . . . .416
91:7-17 . . . . . . .286
91:79 . . . . . . . . .416
92:9 . . . . . . . . . .416
99:3 . . . . . . . . . .225
100:7 . . . . . . . . .408
103:7 . . . . . . . . .416
104:1 . . . . . . . . .225
2 Enoch
50:3-4 . . . . . . . .321
50:4 . . . . . . . . . .312
4 Ezra
5:1-13 .
6:13-24
6:19 . . .
8:51-54
9:1-3 . .
10:6-16
13:35 . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.224
.224
.408
.223
.224
.224
.286
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.233
.220
.220
.336
.416
.283
.261
.416
Epistle of Aristeas
219 . . . . . . . . . .322
224 . . . . . .314, 322
457
Testament of
Naphtali
2:2 . . . . . . . . . . .249
2:4 . . . . . . . . . . .249
8:2-3 . . . . . . . . .286
10:13 . . . . . . . . .275
11:4 . . . . . . . . . . .97
12:2 . . . . . . . . . . .97
12:14 . . . . . . . . .408
13:4 . . . . . . . . . .408
Testament of
Zebulun
9:7-8 . . . . . . . . .286
1 QS
1:21-24 . . . . . . .402
2:21-22 . . . . . . . .97
2:4-9 . . . . . . . . . .97
3:5 . . . . . . . . . . .337
3:17-26 . . . . . . .217
5:6 . . . . . . . . . . .408
5:10-13 . . . . . . . .97
9:16-18 . . . . . . . .97
10:16-18 . . . . . .408
10:17-18 . . . . . .312
11:22 . . . . . . . . .249
QUMRAN/DEAD
SEA SCROLLS
CD
4:2-12 . . . . . . . .246
4:12-17 . . . . . . . .84
6:17-18 . . . . . . .335
7:9 . . . . . . . . . . .408
8:4-10 . . . . . . . . .84
9:2-5 . . . . . . . . .312
12:19-20 . . . . . .337
1 QH
1:21-27 . . . . . . .197
1:26 . . . . . . . . . .402
1:31 . . . . . . . . . .402
2:12 . . . . . . . . . .275
3:7-18 . . . . . . . .224
3:19-29 . . . . . . .197
4:6-8 . . . . . . . . . .97
4:9-11 . . . . . . . . .97
4:13-14 . . . . . . . .97
4:21 . . . . . . . . . .402
5:6 . . . . . . . . . . .402
6:8 . . . . . . . . . . .275
7:10 . . . . . . . . . .275
7:12 . . . . . . . . . .275
9:34 . . . . . . . . . .402
11:14 . . . . . . . . .402
11:9-10 . . . . . . .197
18:12 . . . . . . . . .408
1 QM
1 QM . . . . . . . . .286
1 Qp. Hab.
8:1 . . . . . . . . . . .408
8:8 . . . . . . . . . . . .97
9:9 . . . . . . . . . . . .97
10:3 . . . . . . . . . .408
10:9 . . . . . . . . . . .97
4 QFlor.
1:11 . . . . . .233, 342
1:12 . . . . . . . . . .286
1:14-19 . . . . . . .246
4 Qp. Ps.
3:4-5 . . . . . . . . .226
37 . . . . . . .226, 275
11 QPat.
3-4 . . . . . . . . . . .342
NEW TESTAMENT
Matthew
4:16 . . . .
5:9 . . . . .
5:38-48 .
5:44 . . . .
6:9-10 . .
7:21 . . . .
12:36 . . .
16:27 . . .
17:24-27
24:8 . . . .
24:36-44
25:1-13 .
25:35 . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.330
.311
.320
.305
.177
.408
.408
.408
.316
.224
.330
.330
.408
Mark
1:4 . . . . . . . . . . .174
2 . . . . . . . . . . .345
458
5:15 . . . . . . . . . .308
7 . . . . . . . . . . .345
7:2 . . . . . . . . . . .337
7:5 . . . . . . . . . . .337
7:15 . . . . . . . . . .337
10:42-45 . . . . . .324
10:45 . . . . . .60, 267
11 . . . . . . . . . . .345
12:13-17 . . . . . .316
12:28-34 . . . . . .320
13:8 . . . . . . . . . .224
13:19 . . . . . . . . .138
13:34-36 . . . . . .330
14:38 . . . . . . . . .331
Luke
3:3 . . . . . . . . . . .174
5 . . . . . . . . . . .345
6:27-36 . . . . . . .320
6:28 . . . . . . . . . .305
7 . . . . . . . . . . .345
8:35 . . . . . . . . . .308
11:2 . . . . . . . . . .177
12:35-40 . . . . . .330
14 . . . . . . . . . . .345
18:9-14 . . . . . . . .59
21:34-36 . . . . . .330
21:36 . . . . . . . . .331
John
1:1-18 . . . . . . . .330
1:29 . . . . . . . . . .174
2:19-21 . . . . . . . .26
3:20-21 . . . . . . .408
4:21 . . . . . . . . . . .26
5:29 . . . . . . . . . .408
10:34 . . . . . . . . . .26
12:46 . . . . . . . . .330
15:25 . . . . . . . . . .26
16:21 . . . . . . . . .224
Acts
2 . . . . . . . . . . . .21
2:10 . . . . . . . . . . .21
2:17-18 . . . . . . .138
2:33 . . . . . . . . . .138
2:38 . . . . . . . . . .174
3:14 . . . . . . . .55, 56
6 . . . . . . . . . . . .26
7 . . . . . . . . . . . .55
7:52 . . . . . . . .55, 56
459
3:9 . . . . . . . . . . .377
3:10 . . . . . .413, 414
3:11 . . . . . . . . . .377
3:12 . .263, 269, 270
3:19 . . . . . . . . . .212
3:19-23 . . . . . . .211
3:21 . . . . . . . . . .212
3:22 . . . . .108, 110,
212, 377
3:23 . . . . . .186, 212
3:23-25 . . . . . . .212
3:24 . . . . . .212, 377
3:25 . . . . . .186, 212
3:26 . .108, 109, 110
3:27 . . . . . .172, 186
4 . . . . . . . .231, 232
4:1-7 . . . . . . . . .211
4:4 . . . . . . . . . . .231
4:4-5 . . . . . . . . .212
4:4-7 . . . . . . . . .231
4:5 . . . . . . .221, 231
4:6 . . . . . . . . . . .231
4:7 . . . . . . . . . . .232
4:8-11 . . . . . . . .314
4:22 . . . . . . . . . .126
Galatians
1:4 . . . . . . . .35, 185 5:4-5 . . . . . . . . .377
1:6-9 . . . . . . . . .353 5:5 . . . . . . . . . . .377
1:7 . . . . . . . . . . . .48 5:10 . . . . . . . . . .308
1:13 . . . . . . . . . .195 5:13-25 . . . . . . .396
1:13-14 . . . . . . .261 5:14 . . . . . . . . . .320
2 . . . .26, 188, 345, 5:16-26 . . .188, 211,
213
346
2:4 . . . . . . . . . . . .26 5:19-23 . . . . . . .217
2:14 . . . . . . . . . . .48 5:24 . . . . . .188, 189
2:15-21 . . .126, 188, 5:25 . . . . . . . . . .189
196 6 . . . . . . . . . . .188
2:16 . .108, 109, 270, 6:7 . . . . . . . . . . .408
377, 413, 414, 6:11-15 . . . . . . .361
415 6:11-16 . . . . . . .188
2:19 . .188, 189, 388 6:11-18 . . . . . . .361
2:20 . .108, 110, 188, 6:13 . . . . . . . . . .144
189, 209, 388 6:14 . . . . .144, 189,
388
3 . . .126, 173, 221,
239, 415 6:15 . . . . . .188, 189
3:1-5 . . . . . . . . .126
3:2 . . . . . .377, 378, Ephesians
413, 414 1:5 . . . . . . . . . . .221
3:5 . . . . . .377, 378, 1:9-10 . . . . . . . .281
413, 414 1:13 . . . . . . .48, 377
3:7 . . . . . . . . . . .377 2 . . . . . . . . . . .144
3:8 . . . . . . . . . . .377 2:5 . . . . . . . . . . .189
10:8 . . . . . . . . . .144
10:14 . . . . . . . . . .48
10:16 . . . . . . . . .353
10:17 . . . . . . . . .144
11:3 . . . . . .195, 306
11:4 . . . . . . .48, 353
11:7 . . . . . . . . . . .48
11:10 . . . . . . . . .144
11:12 . . . . . . . . .144
11:15 . . . . .357, 408
11:18 . . . . . . . . .144
11:22 . . . . . . . . .126
11:23 . . . . . . . . .357
11:23-25 . . . . . .315
11:30 . . . . . . . . .144
12:5 . . . . . . . . . .144
12:9 . . . . . . . . . .144
12:10 . . . . . . . . .303
13:4 . . . . . . . . . .388
13:11 . . . . .308, 356
13:12 . . . . . . . . .360
13:13 . . . . . . . . .354
13:14 . . . . . . . . .354
460
2:9 . . . . . . . . . . .144
2:11-12 . . . . . . .217
2:16 . . . . . . . . . .144
2:19-21 . . . . . . .338
3:3-6 . . . . . . . . .281
3:7 . . . . . . . . . . .357
3:12 . .108, 110, 111
4 . . . . . . . . . . .304
4:12 . . . . . . . . . .338
4:16 . . . . . . . . . .338
4:17 . . . . . . . . . .306
4:17-19 . . . . . . .217
4:22 . . . . . . . . . .328
4:22-24 . . . . . . .176
4:25 . . . . . . . . . .328
4:29 . . . . . . . . . .338
5:8-14 . . . . . . . .330
5:8-20 . . . . . . . .327
5:18 . . . . . . . . . .330
6:8 . . . . . . . . . . .408
6:9 . . . . . . . . . . . .75
6:10-20 . . .330, 331
6:11-17 . . .178, 185
6:18 . . . . . . . . . .331
6:21 . . . . . . . . . .357
Philippians
1:1 . . . . . . . . . . .357
1:5 . . . . . . . . . . .354
1:26 . . . . . . . . . .144
1:27 . . . . . . . . . . .48
1:28 . . . . . . . . . .412
1:29 . . . . . . . . . .377
2:1 . . . . . . . . . . .354
2:2 . . . . . . . . . . .308
2:5-11 . . . . . . . .307
2:6-11 . . . . . . . .411
3 . . . . . . . . . . .215
3:2-11 . . . . . . . .407
3:2-21 . . . . . . . .361
3:3 . . . . . . . . . . .144
3:4 . . . . . . . . . . .195
3:4-11 . . . . . . . .303
3:6 . . . . . . . . . . .261
3:9 . . . . . . .108, 110
3:10 . . . . . .354, 388
3:19 . .306, 361, 412
3:21 . . . . . .189, 388
4:2 . . . . . . .297, 308
4:9 . . . . . . . . . . .356
5:15
5:23
5:25
5:26
. . . . . . . . . .313
. . . . . . . . . .356
. . . . . . . . . . .96
. . . . . . . . . .360
2 Thessalonians
1:8 . . . . . . . . . . . .48
1:8-9 . . . . . . . . .412
3:3 . . . . . . . . . . . .96
3:16 . . . . . . . . . .356
3:17 . . . . . . . . . .361
1 Timothy
2 . . . . . . . . . . .323
2:1 . . . . . . . . . . .323
2:1-2 . . . . . . . . .316
2:1-3 . . . . . . . . .323
2:2 . . . . . . . . . . .323
2:3-4 . . . . . . . . .323
2:4 . . . . . . . . . . .323
2:6 . . . . . . . . . . .323
2:9 . . . . . . . . . . .307
2:14 . . . . . . . . . .195
2:15 . . . . . . . . . .307
3:2 . . . . . . . . . . .307
3:4-5 . . . . . . . . .357
3:8 . . . . . . . . . . .357
3:12 . . . . . . . . . .357
3:16 . . . . . . . . . . .60
4:6 . . . . . . . . . . .357
5:17 . . . . . . . . . .357
5:24-25 . . . . . . .408
6:2-11 . . . . . . . .217
2 Timothy
1:7 . . . . . .
2:11 . . . . .
2:11-12 . .
4:11 . . . . .
4:14 . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.307
.189
.388
.362
.408
Titus
1:8 . .
2:2 . .
2:4 . .
2:5 . .
2:6 . .
2:12 .
3:1 . .
3:1-3
3:3 . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.307
.307
.307
.307
.307
.307
.316
.323
.323
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
461
1 John
2:1 . . . . . . . . .55, 56
2:29 . . . . . . . . . . .55
3:7 . . . . . . . . . . . .55
3 John
6 . . . . . . . . . . .354
Revelation
2:23 . . . . .
3:19 . . . . .
6:12-17 . .
14:13 . . . .
16 . . . . . .
20:12-13 .
22:12 . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.408
.138
.224
.408
.138
.408
.408
EARLY CHURCH
FATHERS
Epistle of Barnabas
18-20 . . . . . . . . .217
Didache
1-5 . . . . . . . . . . .217
Letter to Polycarp
5:1 . . . . . . . . . . .357
2 Clement
12:5 . . . . . . . . . .357
19:1 . . . . . . . . . .357
20:2 . . . . . . . . . .357
OTHER JEWISH
WRITINGS
De Confusione
Lenguarum
163 . . . . . . . . . . .84
De Decalogo
142 . . . . . . . . . .198
Legum Allegoriae
155-158 . . . . . . .335
De Somniis
1:65-66 . . . . . . . .70
1:68-69 . . . . . . . .70
The Author
John E. Toews has a rich professional career in teaching biblical
studies and serving as an academic dean and president at various
Mennonite colleges and seminaries. He served at Fresno Pacific
College (1961-68), Conrad Grebel University College (1970-73,
1996-2002), Tabor College (1973-77), Mennonite Brethren Biblical
Seminary (1977-1995). At the end of December 2002, Toews retired
as president of Conrad Grebel University College in Waterloo, Ontario.
Toews was born in Hepburn, Saskatchewan, and grew up in
numerous communities in Canada and the U.S. He graduated with a
B.A. in History (high honors) from Tabor College in 1958, and an
M.A. in European Intellectual History from Wichita State University in
1960. Following studies in theology at Mennonite Brethren Bible
College, Mennonite Brethren Biblical Seminary, University of
Southern California, and Pacific School of Religion, he entered doctoral studies in New Testament at Garrett Theological
Seminary/Northwestern University in 1968 and graduated with a
Ph.D. in 1977.
Many of Toews writings have been under assignment from church
bodies such as the U.S. Conference and the General Conference of
Mennonite Brethren Churches respectively. He edited the books, The
Power of the Lamb and Your Daughters Shall Prophesy, in which
he also contributed numerous chapters.
Toews and his wife Arlene are charter members of the College
Community Church (Mennonite Brethren) in Clovis, California. They
have three adult childrenDelora Toews Schneider, Dawn Toews
Hartman, and Mark Toews, and twin grandsons.
463